BackgroundChest compression quality is a determinant of survival from sudden cardiac arrest. The CPR RsQ Assist Device (CPR RAD) is a new cardiopulmonary resuscitation device for chest compression. It is operated manually but it does not pull up on the chest on the up stroke. The aim of this study was to compare the CPR RAD with standard manual compression in terms of chest compression quality in a manikin model.MethodsParticipants were randomly assigned to either the device or manual chest compression group. Each participant performed a maximum of 4 minutes of hands-only compression with or without the device. During chest compression, the following quality parameters from the manikin were recorded: compression rate, compression depth, and correctness of hand position.ResultsDuration of chest compression was significantly higher in device users compared with manual compression (223.93±36.53 vs 179.67±50.81 seconds; P<0.001). The mean compression depth did not differ in a statistically significant way between manual compression and device at 2 minutes (56.42±6.42 vs 54.25±5.32; P=0.052). During the first and second minutes, compression rate was higher in cases of standard compression (133.21±15.95 vs 108±9.45; P<0.001 and 127.41±27.77 vs 108.5±9.93; P<0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the percentage of participants who employed compression that was too shallow or exhibited incorrect hand position.ConclusionThe CPR RAD is more effective in chest compression compared with manual chest compression, as using the device led to better results in terms of fatigue reduction and correct compression rate than standard manual compression.
Patients with mild head injuries, a GCS of 13–15, are at risk for intracranial hemorrhage. Clinical decision is needed to weigh between risks of intracranial hemorrhage and costs of the CT scan of the brain particularly those who are equivocal. This study aimed to find predictors for intracranial hemorrhage in patients with mild head injuries with a moderate risk of intracranial hemorrhage. We defined moderate risk of mild head injury as a GCS score of 13–15 accompanied by at least one symptom such as headache, vomiting, or amnesia or with alcohol intoxication. There were 153 patients who met the study criteria. Eighteen of the patients (11.76%) had intracranial hemorrhage. There were four independent factors associated with intracranial hemorrhage: history of hypertension, headache, loss of consciousness, and baseline GCS. The sensitivity for the presence of intracranial hemorrhage was 100% with the cutoff point for the GCS of 13. In conclusion, the independent factors associated with intracranial hemorrhage in patients with mild head injury who were determined to be at moderate risk for the condition included history of hypertension, headache, loss of consciousness, and baseline GCS score.
OBJECTIVES: Endotracheal tube (ETT) displacement occurs by improper fixation. To fix an ETT, many types of fixation tools are employed. Thomas tube holder is one of the fixation tools widely used in many countries. This study aims to compare the ETT fixation using the Thomas tube holder with the conventional method (adhesive tape) in a mannequin model. METHODS: The fixation tools were random, using the box of six randomizes to Thomas tube holder and conventional method. After fixation, the mannequin model was being logged roll, chest compression by automated chest compression machine, and transported by the paramedic. The time to ETT fixation and displacements were recorded. RESULTS: The mean time (standard deviation) to fixate an ETT was shorter (33.0 s [7.3]) with a Thomas tube holder compared to adhesive tape (52.6 s [7.3], P < 0.001). The number and proportion of the ETT displacements were significantly less with Thomas tube holder compared to adhesive tape during log roll (16, 35.6% vs. 29, 64.4%, P = 0.011), chest compression with automated machine (23, 51.1% vs. 37, 82.2%, P = 0.003), and transport (26, 57.8% vs. 40, 88.9%, P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: The Thomas tube holder is more effective than adhesive tape in preventing ETT displacement in a mannequin subjected to log roll, chest compressions, and transportation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.