AIMS: To compare quality of CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with and without automated feedback. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive adult, out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of all causes were studied. One hundred and seventy-six episodes (March 2002-October 2003) without feedback were compared to 108 episodes (October 2003-September 2004) where automatic feedback on CPR was given. Automated verbal and visual feedback was based on measured quality with a prototype defibrillator. Quality of CPR was the main outcome measure and survival was reported as specified in the protocol. RESULTS: Average compression depth increased from (mean +/- S.D.) 34 +/- 9 to 38 +/- 6 mm (mean difference (95% CI) 4 (2, 6), P < 0.001), and median percentage of compressions with adequate depth (38-51 mm) increased from 24% to 53% (P < 0.001, Mann-Whitney U-test) with feedback. Mean compression rate decreased from 121 +/- 18 to 109 +/- 12 min(-1) (difference -12 (-16, -9), P = 0.001). There were no changes in the mean number of ventilations per minute; 11 +/- 5 min(-1) versus 11 +/- 4 min(-1) (difference 0 (-1, 1), P = 0.8) or the fraction of time without chest compressions; 0.48 +/- 0.18 versus 0.45 +/- 0.17 (difference -0.03 (-0.08, 0.01), P = 0.08). With intention to treat analysis 7/241 control patients were discharged alive (2.9%) versus 5/117 with feedback (4.3%) (OR 1.5 (95% CI; 0.8, 3), P = 0.2). In a logistic regression analysis of all cases, witnessed arrest (OR 4.2 (95% CI; 1.6, 11), P = 0.004) and average compression depth (per mm increase) (OR 1.05 (95% CI; 1.01, 1.09), P = 0.02) were associated with rate of hospital admission. CONCLUSIONS: Automatic feedback improved CPR quality in this prospective non-randomised study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Increased compression depth was associated with increased short-term survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00138996), http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/.
AIMS: To compare quality of CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with and without automated feedback. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive adult, out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of all causes were studied. One hundred and seventy-six episodes (March 2002-October 2003) without feedback were compared to 108 episodes (October 2003-September 2004) where automatic feedback on CPR was given. Automated verbal and visual feedback was based on measured quality with a prototype defibrillator. Quality of CPR was the main outcome measure and survival was reported as specified in the protocol. RESULTS: Average compression depth increased from (mean +/- S.D.) 34 +/- 9 to 38 +/- 6 mm (mean difference (95% CI) 4 (2, 6), P < 0.001), and median percentage of compressions with adequate depth (38-51 mm) increased from 24% to 53% (P < 0.001, Mann-Whitney U-test) with feedback. Mean compression rate decreased from 121 +/- 18 to 109 +/- 12 min(-1) (difference -12 (-16, -9), P = 0.001). There were no changes in the mean number of ventilations per minute; 11 +/- 5 min(-1) versus 11 +/- 4 min(-1) (difference 0 (-1, 1), P = 0.8) or the fraction of time without chest compressions; 0.48 +/- 0.18 versus 0.45 +/- 0.17 (difference -0.03 (-0.08, 0.01), P = 0.08). With intention to treat analysis 7/241 control patients were discharged alive (2.9%) versus 5/117 with feedback (4.3%) (OR 1.5 (95% CI; 0.8, 3), P = 0.2). In a logistic regression analysis of all cases, witnessed arrest (OR 4.2 (95% CI; 1.6, 11), P = 0.004) and average compression depth (per mm increase) (OR 1.05 (95% CI; 1.01, 1.09), P = 0.02) were associated with rate of hospital admission. CONCLUSIONS: Automatic feedback improved CPR quality in this prospective non-randomised study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Increased compression depth was associated with increased short-term survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00138996), http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/.
Authors: Dana E Niles; Akira Nishisaki; Robert M Sutton; Jon Nysæther; Joar Eilevstjønn; Jessica Leffelman; Matthew R Maltese; Kristy B Arbogast; Benjamin S Abella; Mark A Helfaer; Robert A Berg; Vinay M Nadkarni Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: C Zebuhr; R M Sutton; W Morrison; D Niles; L Boyle; A Nishisaki; P Meaney; J Leffelman; R A Berg; V M Nadkarni Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2012-02-03 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Masayuki Iyanaga; Randal Gray; Shannon W Stephens; Olajide Akinsanya; Joel Rodgers; Kathleen Smyrski; Henry E Wang Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Akira Nishisaki; Matthew R Maltese; Dana E Niles; Robert M Sutton; Javier Urbano; Robert A Berg; Vinay M Nadkarni Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2012-02-04 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Blair L Bigham; Kent Koprowicz; Tom Rea; Paul Dorian; Tom P Aufderheide; Daniel P Davis; Judy Powell; Laurie J Morrison Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2011-03-31 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Robert M Sutton; Dana Niles; Benjamin French; Matthew R Maltese; Jessica Leffelman; Joar Eilevstjønn; Heather Wolfe; Akira Nishisaki; Peter A Meaney; Robert A Berg; Vinay M Nadkarni Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2013-08-29 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Robert M Sutton; Dana Niles; Peter A Meaney; Richard Aplenc; Benjamin French; Benjamin S Abella; Evelyn L Lengetti; Robert A Berg; Mark A Helfaer; Vinay Nadkarni Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2011-06-06 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: R P Lukas; C Sengelhoff; S Döpker; U Harding; P Mertens; N Osada; H Van Aken; T P Weber; A Bohn Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: Mathias Zuercher; Ronald W Hilwig; James Ranger-Moore; Jon Nysaether; Vinay M Nadkarni; Marc D Berg; Karl B Kern; Robert Sutton; Robert A Berg Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 7.598