Background:The aim of the study was to evaluate various methods of chest compressions in patients with suspected/confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection conducted by medical students wearing full personal protective equipment (PPE) for aerosol generating procedures (AGP). Methods: This was prospective, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, crossover simulation trial. Thirty-five medical students after an advanced cardiovascular life support course, which included performing 2-min continuous chest compression scenarios using three methods: (A) manual chest compression (CC), (B) compression with CPRMeter, (C) compression with LifeLine ARM device. During resuscitation they are wearing full personal protective equipment for aerosol generating procedures. Results: The median chest compression depth using manual CC, CPRMeter and LifeLine ARM varied and amounted to 40 (38-45) vs. 45 (40-50) vs. 51 (50-52) mm, respectively (p = 0.002). The median chest compression rate was 109 (IQR; 102-131) compressions per minute (CPM) for manual CC, 107 (105-127) CPM for CPRMeter, and 102 (101-102) CPM for LifeLine ARM (p = 0.027). The percentage of correct chest recoil was the highest for LifeLine ARM -100% (95-100), 80% (60-90) in CPRMeter group, and the lowest for manual . Conclusions: According to the results of this simulation trial, automated chest compression devices (ACCD) should be used for chest compression of patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19. In the absence of ACCD, it seems reasonable to change the cardiopulmonary resuscitation algorithm (in the context of patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19) by reducing the duration of the cardiopulmonary resuscitation cycle from the current 2-min to 1-min cycles due to a statistically significant reduction in the quality of chest compressions among rescuers wearing PPE AGP.

Emergency airway management in children is generally considered to be challenging, and endotracheal intubation requires a high level of personal skills and experience. Immobilization of the cervical spine is indicated in all patients with the risk of any cervical spine injury but significantly aggravates endotracheal intubation. The best airway device in this setting has not been established yet, although the use of videolaryngoscopes is generally promising. Seventy-five moderately experienced paramedics of the Emergency Medical Service of Poland performed endotracheal intubations in a pediatric manikin in three airway scenarios: (A) normal airway, (B) manual in-line cervical immobilization, and (C) cervical immobilization using a Patriot cervical extrication collar and using two airway techniques: (1) McGrath videolaryngoscope and (2) Macintosh blade in a randomized sequence. First-attempt intubation success rate, time to intubation, glottis visualization, and subjective ease of intubation were investigated in this study. Intubation of difficult airways, including manual in-line and cervical collar immobilization, using the McGrath was significantly faster, with a higher first-attempt intubation success rate, better glottic visualization, and ease of intubation, compared to Macintosh-guided intubation. In the normal airway, both airway techniques performed equal. Conclusion: Our manikin study indicates that the McGrath may be a reasonable first intubation technique option for endotracheal intubation in difficult pediatric emergencies. Further clinical studies are therefore indicated. What is known : • Airway management in pediatrics is challenging and requires a high level of skills and experience. Cervical immobilization is indicated in all patients with any risk of cervical spine injury, but it significantly aggravates endotracheal intubation in these patients. Videolaryngoscopes have been reported to ease intubation and provide better airway visualization in the regular clinical setting. What is new: • The McGrath is an easy-to-use and clinically often used videolaryngoscope, but it has never been investigated in pediatrics with an immobilized cervical spine. In the normal airway, the McGrath provided better airway visualization compared to Macintosh laryngoscopy. However, better visualization did not lead to decreased time to intubation and a higher success rate of the first intubation attempt. In difficult airways, the McGrath provided better airway visualization and this led to faster intubation, a higher first-attempt intubation success rate, and better ease of intubation compared to Macintosh-guided intubation.

Background: Immobilization of the cervical spine is indicated in all patients with the potential risk of any cervical spine injury. Airway management in these patients is challenging and direct laryngoscopy is the standard of care. Videolaryngoscopes like the ET-View were introduced into clinical practice to provide better airway visualization and ease intubation. Although the ET-View is essentially a conventional endotracheal tube, it is equipped with a miniature camera in its tip. The ET-View has not been investigated in patients with immobilized cervical spine so far. The aim was to evaluate the performance of the VivaSight SL compared with Macintosh when performed in patients with immobilized cervical spine by inexperienced physicians. Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, cross-over manikin trial. Fifty novice physicians were randomly assigned to intubate a manikin in three airway scenarios including a normal airway and two cervical immobilization techniques. The overall and first intubation attempt success rate, time to intubation, dental compression and airway visualization according to the Cormack and Lehane classification were assessed. Results: All physicians were able to intubate the manikin in all scenarios using the ET-View, whereas direct laryngoscopy failed in 16% with immobilized cervical spine using the patriot cervical extraction collar. The first intubation attempt success rate was higher and airway visualization was better in all three scenarios using the ET-View compared to direct laryngoscopy. Conclusion:The ET-View offered much better 62 airway visualization and provided higher overall and first intubation attempt success rates. Therefore, the ET-View is a valuable alternative in patients with difficult intubation due to immobilized cervical spine. Further clinical trials are indicated to confirm these findings.

No abstract

Background: International resuscitation guidelines emphasize the importance of high quality chest compressions, including correct chest compression depth and rate and complete chest recoil. The aim of the study was to assess the role of the TrueCPR device in the process of teaching cardiopulmonary resuscitation in nursing students. Methods: A prospective randomized experimental study was performed among 94 first year students of nursing. On the next day, the participants were divided into 2 groups—the control group practiced chest compressions without the use of any device for half an hour, and the experimental group practiced with the use of TrueCPR. Further measurement of chest compressions was performed after a month. Results: The chest compression rate achieved the value of 113 versus 126 ( P < .001), adequate chest compression rate (%) was 86 versus 68 ( P < .001), full chest release (%) 92 versus 69 ( P = .001), and correct hand placement (%) 99 versus 99 ( P , not significant) in TrueCPR and standard BLS groups, respectively. As for the assessment of the confidence of chest compression quality, 1 month after the training, the evaluation in the experimental group was statistically significantly higher (91 vs 71; P < .001) than in the control group. Conclusions: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation training with the use of the TrueCPR device is associated with better resuscitation skills 1 month after the training. The participants using TrueCPR during the training achieved a better chest compression rate and depth with in international recommendations and better full chest release percentage and self-assessed confidence of chest compression quality comparing with standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation training.