Quality of chest compressionwith CardioPump CPR compared to single rescuer standard BLS

Kurowski, Andrzej; Czyżewski, Łukasz; Bogdański, Łukasz; Zaśko, Piotr; Karczewska, Katarzyna; Szarpak, Łukasz

doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2014.10.027

Cited by 6 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another important factor influencing the return of spontaneous circulation is the frequency of CCs [16]. Field et al [25] showed that a CC rate of 100-120/min -1 for 2 min is feasible whilst maintaining adequate CC quality in terms of depth, duty-cycle, leaning, and decay in compression performance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does the use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation feedback devices improve the quality of chest compressions performed by doctors? A prospective, randomized, cross-over simulation study

Majer¹,

Jaguszewski

Frass

et al. 2019

Cardiol J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bad hand placement on the chest may cause damage to the patient's chest [15]. Performing CCs based on the above recommendations determines the highest quality of CCs, translating directly to the resuscitation outcome in the form of a return of spontaneous circulation [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does the use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation feedback devices improve the quality of chest compressions performed by doctors? A prospective, randomized, cross-over simulation study

Majer¹,

Jaguszewski

Frass

et al. 2019

Cardiol J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In several studies, the CCs performed by medical personnel turned out too shallow or too deep [10,23]. In a research by Peberdy et al, the participants provided too shallow CCs in 34% of the attempts, whereas the CCs in 12% of the attempts were too deep [24].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) is the leading cause of death in Europe, with an overall resuscitation success rate less than 10% despite widespread train-ing in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and defibrillation [1,2]. Although survival from cardiac arrest requires high-quality CPR [3,4], some studies demonstrate that the quality of CPR performance www.journals.viamedica.pl/disaster_and_emergency_medicine during SCA is poor, even when CPR is conducted by medical staff [5][6][7][8][9]. Moreover, CPR quality becomes ineffective within minutes due to rescuer fatigue [10,11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of Chest Compressions With the Use of the New Mechanical Chest Compression Machine Lifeline Arm: A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study in Novice Physicians

Aleksandrowicz¹,

Madziała²,

Iskrzycki³

et al. 2016

Disaster Emerg Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: The Lifeline ARM (ARM; Defibtech, Guilford, USA) is a new mechanical chest compression device. The aim of the current study was to compare the quality of single rescuer cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with and without ARM device. METHODS: In this randomized crossover manikin trial forty-four novice physicians participated. Thirty minutes of training was allotted for manual CPR and then for the ARM. The following day, every participant performed a 2-min CPR single rescuer scenario, once with manual CPR and once with the ARM. The primary outcome measure of the study is effective compression; defined as compressions performed with the correct of depth of 50-60 mm, complete decompressions, and the correct pressure point of CC. RESULTS: The ARM, compared with manual CPR, carried out more effective compressions (96 [interquartile range, IQR; 94-98] vs. 36 [IQR; 33-41]%, p < 0.001). The compressions preformed with the use of the ARM, furthermore, were with a correct CC rate (100 [IQR; 99-101] vs. 130 [IQR; 124-140] min-1 ; p < 0.001) and a correct depth (97 [IQR; 96-98] vs. 37 [IQR; 31-39]%; p < 0.001). The result of resuscitation with ARM was significantly better than manual CPR (p < 0.05) for all of the analyzed chest compression parameters (percentage of CC too deep, percentage of CC too shallow, percentage of correct pressure points and percentage of correct pressure releases), as well as for the ventilation parameters (tidal volume, ventilation rate, minute-volume, gastric inflations). CONCLUSION: During this simulated trial, when CPR was performed by novice physicians, the ARM significantly improved the quality of CPR. Further clinical trials should provide motivation to confirm the potential benefits of ARM use during CPR.

show abstract

“…According to numerous studies, CCs with a frequency higher than 120 cpm have no effect on survival improvement and furthermore cause the rescuer to tire more quickly, which may result in lowering the quality of CCs [17]. As indicated in numerous studies involving both children and adults, maintaining adequate CC frequency can be problematic because medical staff tend to perform CCs with too high a rate [18][19][20]. Moreover, the optimal frequency of CCs in both children and adults is not specified [21][22][23].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which position should we take during newborn resuscitation? A prospective, randomised, multicentre simulation trial

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A b s t r a c tBackground: Early bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for cardiac arrest is crucial in the chain of survival. Cardiac arrest in infants is rare, but CPR is also performed in severe bradycardia. European Resuscitation Council and American Heart Association guidelines recommend continuing CPR until the heart muscle is sufficiently oxygenated and regains sufficient contractility and function. The most common and recommended CPR techniques that can be applied in newborns are the two-finger technique and two-thumb technique. Aim:We sought to assess the quality of CPR performed in newborns with the two-finger technique depending on the position of the rescuer during resuscitation. Methods:This was a prospective, randomised, crossover, simulated study. It involved 93 nurses who were required to perform a two-minute CPR using the two-finger technique in three scenarios: (A) with the newborn lying on the floor; (B) on a table; and (C) with the newborn on the rescuer's forearm. The Newborn Tory ® S2210 manikin was used to simulate a neonatal patient in cardiac arrest. The following parameters were measured: chest compression (CC) depth, CC rate, no-flow time, percentage of full release, ventilation rate, and ventilation volume, as well as the number of effective compressions and effective ventilations.Results: Statistical analysis showed significant differences in CC rates between scenarios A and B (p < 0.001) and between scenarios B and C (p = 0.002). Significant differences were also observed between the median CC depth. The median percentage of no-flow-fraction was the highest for scenario A (55%), followed by scenario B (48%), and scenario C (46%). There were significant differences between the values of no-flow-fraction between scenarios A and B (p < 0.001), and between scenarios A and C (p < 0.001). The percentage of chest full releases for scenarios A, B, and C amounted to 94%, 1%, and 92%, respectively. Significant differences in the number of effective CCs between scenarios A and B (p < 0.001) as well as B and C (p < 0.001) were revealed. The median ventilation rate was highest for scenario B (13 × min ). The highest tidal volume was obtained in scenario A (27 mL), and the lowest in scenario C (26 mL). The most effective CPR was performed when resuscitation was carried out on the rescuer's forearm. Conclusions:The quality of CCs in newborns depends on the location of the patient and the rescuer. The optimal form of resuscitation of newborns is resuscitation on the rescuer's forearm.

show abstract

Quality of chest compressionwith CardioPump CPR compared to single rescuer standard BLS

Cited by 6 publications

References 5 publications

Does the use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation feedback devices improve the quality of chest compressions performed by doctors? A prospective, randomized, cross-over simulation study

Does the use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation feedback devices improve the quality of chest compressions performed by doctors? A prospective, randomized, cross-over simulation study

Performance of Chest Compressions With the Use of the New Mechanical Chest Compression Machine Lifeline Arm: A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study in Novice Physicians

Which position should we take during newborn resuscitation? A prospective, randomised, multicentre simulation trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About