Scott T Youngquist1, Patrick Ockerse2, Sydney Hartsell3, Chris Stratford2, Peter Taillac4. 1. University of Utah School of Medicine, Division of Emergency Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, United States; The Salt Lake City Fire Department, Salt Lake City, UT, United States. Electronic address: scott.youngquist@utah.edu. 2. University of Utah School of Medicine, Division of Emergency Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, United States. 3. The University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, United States. 4. University of Utah School of Medicine, Division of Emergency Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, United States; The Utah Department of Health, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services, United States.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare functional survival (discharge cerebral performance category 1 or 2) among victims of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) who had resuscitations performed using mechanical chest compression (mech-CC) devices vs. those using manual chest compressions (man-CC). METHODS: Observational cohort of 2600 cases of OHCA from a statewide, prospectively-collected cardiac arrest registry (Utah Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival). Comparison of functional survival among those receiving mech-CC vs man-CC was performed using a mixed-effects Poisson model with inverse probability weighted propensity scores to control for selection bias. RESULTS: Overall, mech-CC was utilized in 405/2600 (16%) of the total arrests in Utah during this period. 371/405 (92%) were of the load-distributing band type (AutoPulse(®)) and 22/405 (5%) were mechanical piston devices (LUCAS™), while 12/405 (3%) employed other devices. The relative risk (RR) for functional survival comparing mech-CC to man-CC after propensity score adjustment was 0.41 (95% CI 0.24-0.70, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical chest compression device use was associated with lower rates of functional survival in this propensity score analysis, controlling for Utstein variables and early return of spontaneous circulation.
OBJECTIVE: To compare functional survival (discharge cerebral performance category 1 or 2) among victims of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) who had resuscitations performed using mechanical chest compression (mech-CC) devices vs. those using manual chest compressions (man-CC). METHODS: Observational cohort of 2600 cases of OHCA from a statewide, prospectively-collected cardiac arrest registry (Utah Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival). Comparison of functional survival among those receiving mech-CC vs man-CC was performed using a mixed-effects Poisson model with inverse probability weighted propensity scores to control for selection bias. RESULTS: Overall, mech-CC was utilized in 405/2600 (16%) of the total arrests in Utah during this period. 371/405 (92%) were of the load-distributing band type (AutoPulse(®)) and 22/405 (5%) were mechanical piston devices (LUCAS™), while 12/405 (3%) employed other devices. The relative risk (RR) for functional survival comparing mech-CC to man-CC after propensity score adjustment was 0.41 (95% CI 0.24-0.70, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical chest compression device use was associated with lower rates of functional survival in this propensity score analysis, controlling for Utstein variables and early return of spontaneous circulation.
Authors: Daniel M Rolston; Timmy Li; Casey Owens; Ghania Haddad; Timothy J Palmieri; Veronika Blinder; Jennifer L Wolff; Michael Cassara; Qiuping Zhou; Lance B Becker Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Keith Couper; Tom Quinn; Ranjit Lall; Anne Devrell; Barry Orriss; Kate Seers; Joyce Yeung; Gavin D Perkins Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2018-08-30 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Stephan Seewald; Manuel Obermaier; Rolf Lefering; Andreas Bohn; Michael Georgieff; Claus-Martin Muth; Jan-Thorsten Gräsner; Siobhán Masterson; Jens Scholz; Jan Wnent Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-01-02 Impact factor: 3.240