Comparison between automated cardiopulmonary resuscitation and manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the rescue of cardiac and respiratory arrest

Abstract

Objective: To compare the efficacy of automated cardiopulmonary resuscitation (A-CPR) and manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation (M-CPR) in the rescue of cardiac and respiratory arrest.
 Methods: A retrospective, single-center observational study was conducted to identify 106 patients by reviewing medical records of 269 patients with cardiac and respiratory arrest treated in The Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shandong Provincial Third Hospital (Jinan, China) from February 2019 to February 2021. Patients were divided into A-CPR group (n = 55) and M-CPR group (n = 51) based on the resuscitation treatment method. The groups were matched for age, gender and the cause of cardiac arrest. Rescue effects, blood gas analysis indicators, respiratory dynamics and condition improvement of the two groups were compared.
 Results: In terms of rescue effects, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rate, successful rate of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), 24-hour survival rate and survival discharge rate in the A-CPR group were higher than M-CPR group (P<0.05). With respect to blood gas analysis indicators and respiratory dynamics, the partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) in the A-CPR group was lower than M-CPR group at 15 and 30 minutes after CPR, while the partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), blood oxygen saturation (SaO2), end expiratory carbon dioxide (PetCO2), coronary perfusion pressure (CPP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) in the A-CPR group were higher than M-CPR group (P<0.05). In aspect of condition improvement, spontaneous breathing, heart rate, spontaneous circulation, blood pressure recovery time and CPR time in the A-CPR group were shorter than M-CPR group (P<0.05).
 Conclusion: The application effect of A-CPR in the rescue of cardiac and respiratory arrest, the improvement of blood gas analysis indexes, respiration and condition improvement are more significant than M-CPR.
 doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.38.8.6598
 How to cite this:Gao M, Niu H, Yuan S. Comparison between automated cardiopulmonary resuscitation and manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the rescue of cardiac and respiratory arrest. Pak J Med Sci. 2022;38(8):2208-2214. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.38.8.6598
 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) dengan menggunakan resusitasi jantung paru (RJP) mekanik dan manual: A literature review

“…Guna mendapatkan keterampilan tersebut dibutuhkan pelatihan terbaru untuk meningkatkan kemampuan tenaga kesehatan (Şener et al, 2021). Pemberian resusitasi yang diberikan harus sesuai dengan kebutuhan pasien yang bergantung pada umur dan teknik yang benar dalam memberikan resusitasi (Gao et al, 2022). Selain itu, ketika tenaga kesehatan memberikan bantuan diperhatikan terkait keselamatan sebagai penolong dan tempat dalam memberikan pertolongan sehingga keselamatan menjadi hal yang harus diutamakan.…”