Literature DB >> 22310728

Assessment of CPR interruptions from transthoracic impedance during use of the LUCAS™ mechanical chest compression system.

Dana Yost1, Reid H Phillips, Louis Gonzales, Charles J Lick, Paul Satterlee, Michael Levy, Joseph Barger, Pamela Dodson, Stephen Poggi, Karen Wojcik, Robert A Niskanen, Fred W Chapman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a key determinant of outcome following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Recent evidence shows manual chest compressions are typically too shallow, interruptions are frequent and prolonged, and incomplete release between compressions is common. Mechanical chest compression systems have been developed as adjuncts for CPR but interruption of CPR during their use is not well documented. AIM: Analyze interruptions of CPR during application and use of the LUCAS™ chest compression system.
METHODS: 54 LUCAS 1 devices operated on compressed air, deployed in 3 major US emergency medical services systems, were used to treat patients with OHCA. Electrocardiogram and transthoracic impedance data from defibrillator/monitors were analyzed to evaluate timing of CPR. Separately, providers estimated their CPR interruption time during application of LUCAS, for comparison to measured application time.
RESULTS: In the 32 cases analyzed, compressions were paused a median of 32.5s (IQR 25-61) to apply LUCAS. Providers' estimates correlated poorly with measured pause length; pauses were often more than twice as long as estimated. The average device compression rate was 104/min (SD 4) and the average compression fraction (percent of time compressions were occurring) during mechanical CPR was 0.88 (SD 0.09).
CONCLUSIONS: Interruptions in chest compressions to apply LUCAS can be <20s but are often much longer, and users do not perceive pause time accurately. Therefore, we recommend better training on application technique, and implementation of systems using impedance data to give users objective feedback on their mechanical chest compression device use.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22310728     DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.01.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Resuscitation        ISSN: 0300-9572            Impact factor:   5.262


  16 in total

Review 1.  [Mechanical resuscitation assist devices].

Authors:  M Fischer; M Breil; M Ihli; M Messelken; S Rauch; J-C Schewe
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.041

2.  Mechanical chest compression: an alternative in helicopter emergency medical services?

Authors:  Holger Gässler; Simone Kümmerle; Marc-Michael Ventzke; Lorenz Lampl; Matthias Helm
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2015-04-28       Impact factor: 3.397

Review 3.  [Inhospital resuscitation : Decisive measures for the outcome].

Authors:  M P Müller; T Jantzen; S Brenner; J Gräsner; K Preiß; J Wnent
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.041

4.  Back Plate Marking of a Mechanical Chest Compression Device to Reduce the Duration of Chest Compression Interruptions.

Authors:  Sireethorn Khunpanich; Wasuntaraporn Pethyabarn
Journal:  Open Access Emerg Med       Date:  2022-08-02

5.  Differences in Hands-off Time According to the Position of a Second Rescuer When Switching Compression in Pre-hospital Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Provided by Two Bystanders: A Randomized, Controlled, Parallel Study.

Authors:  Yong Hwan Kim; Jun Ho Lee; Dong Woo Lee; Kwang Won Cho; Mun Ju Kang; Yang Weon Kim; Kyoung Yul Lee; Young Hwan Lee; Jin Joo Kim; Seong Youn Hwang
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2015-08-13       Impact factor: 2.153

6.  Quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest before and after introduction of a mechanical chest compression device, LUCAS-2; a prospective, observational study.

Authors:  Tinne Tranberg; Jens F Lassen; Anne K Kaltoft; Troels M Hansen; Carsten Stengaard; Lars Knudsen; Sven Trautner; Christian J Terkelsen
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 2.953

7.  Safety of mechanical chest compression devices AutoPulse and LUCAS in cardiac arrest: a randomized clinical trial for non-inferiority.

Authors:  Rudolph W Koster; Ludo F Beenen; Esther B van der Boom; Anje M Spijkerboer; Robert Tepaske; Allart C van der Wal; Stefanie G Beesems; Jan G Tijssen
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2017-10-21       Impact factor: 29.983

Review 8.  [Adult advanced life support].

Authors:  Jasmeet Soar; Bernd W Böttiger; Pierre Carli; Keith Couper; Charles D Deakin; Therese Djärv; Carsten Lott; Theresa Olasveengen; Peter Paal; Tommaso Pellis; Gavin D Perkins; Claudio Sandroni; Jerry P Nolan
Journal:  Notf Rett Med       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 0.826

9.  Software annotation of defibrillator files: Ready for prime time?

Authors:  Vishal Gupta; Robert H Schmicker; Pamela Owens; Ava E Pierce; Ahamed H Idris
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2020-12-31       Impact factor: 5.262

10.  Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation With Mechanical Chest Compression Device During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. A Case Report.

Authors:  Dóra Ujvárosy; Veronika Sebestyén; Tamás Ötvös; Balázs Ratku; István Lorincz; Tibor Szuk; Zoltán Csanádi; Ervin Berényi; Zoltán Szabó
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-06-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.