Background Virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) have recently become popular research themes. However, there are no published bibliometric reports that have analyzed the corresponding scientific literature in relation to the application of these technologies in medicine. Objective We used a bibliometric approach to identify and analyze the scientific literature on VR and AR research in medicine, revealing the popular research topics, key authors, scientific institutions, countries, and journals. We further aimed to capture and describe the themes and medical conditions most commonly investigated by VR and AR research. Methods The Web of Science electronic database was searched to identify relevant papers on VR research in medicine. Basic publication and citation data were acquired using the “Analyze” and “Create Citation Report” functions of the database. Complete bibliographic data were exported to VOSviewer and Bibliometrix, dedicated bibliometric software packages, for further analyses. Visualization maps were generated to illustrate the recurring keywords and words mentioned in the titles and abstracts. Results The analysis was based on data from 8399 papers. Major research themes were diagnostic and surgical procedures, as well as rehabilitation. Commonly studied medical conditions were pain, stroke, anxiety, depression, fear, cancer, and neurodegenerative disorders. Overall, contributions to the literature were globally distributed with heaviest contributions from the United States and United Kingdom. Studies from more clinically related research areas such as surgery, psychology, neurosciences, and rehabilitation had higher average numbers of citations than studies from computer sciences and engineering. Conclusions The conducted bibliometric analysis unequivocally reveals the versatile emerging applications of VR and AR in medicine. With the further maturation of the technology and improved accessibility in countries where VR and AR research is strong, we expect it to have a marked impact on clinical practice and in the life of patients.

An initially shockable electrocardiogram proved to be a suitable tool for risk assessment and decision making in order to predict a successful outcome in elderly victims of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. However, the outcomes of elderly patients seemed to be exceptionally poor in frail individuals and need to be considered in order to reduce unnecessary treatment decisions.

No abstract

Further promotion of these criteria within the ambulance crews is needed. May be these criteria could serve as a decision support for emergency physicians/paramedics, which patients to transport with on-going CPR to the ED for E-ECLS.

BackgroundLaypersons' efforts to initiate basic life support (BLS) in witnessed Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA) remain comparably low within western society. Therefore, in order to shorten no-flow times in cardiac arrest, several police-based first responder systems equipped with automated external defibrillators (Pol-AED) were established in urban areas, which subsequently allow early BLS and AED administration by police officers. However, data on the quality of BLS and AED use in such a system and its impact on patient outcome remain scarce and inconclusive. MethodsA total of 85 Pol-AED cases were randomly assigned to a gender, age and first rhythm matched non-Pol-AED control group (n = 170) in a 1:2 ratio. Data on quality of BLS were extracted via trans-thoracic impedance tracings of used AED devices. ResultsComparing Pol-AED cases and the control group, we observed a similar compression rate per minute (p = 0.677) and compression ratio (p = 0.651), mirroring an overall high quality of BLS administered by police officers. Time to the first shock was significantly shorter in Pol-AED cases (6 minutes [IQR: 2-10] vs. 12 minutes [IQR: 8-17]; p<0.001). While Pol-AED was not associated with increased sustained return of spontaneous circulation (p = 0.564), a strong and independent impact on survival until hospital discharge (adj. OR: 1.85 [95%CI: 1.06-3.23; p = 0.030]) and a borderline significance for the association with favorable neurological outcome (adj. OR: 1.58 [95%CI: 0.96-2.89; p = 0.052) were observed.