Literature DB >> 671684

External cardiac compression. A randomized comparison of mechanical and manual techniques.

G J Taylor, R Rubin, M Tucker, H L Greene, M T Rudikoff, M L Weisfeldt.   

Abstract

To compare the effectiveness of manual and mechanical chest compression during cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 50 patients who suffered cardiac arrest were randomly allocated to receive manual or mechanical chest compression. Randomization was performed after failure of initial resuscitative measures but within ten minutes after the onset of cardiac arrest (mean, 6.4 +/- 1.2 min). Ten patients from each group survived longer than one hour following resuscitation. Three from the mechanical group and two from the manual group were eventually able to leave the hospital. Thus mechanical compression appears comparable with manual compression when manual compression is performed under ideal conditions. Mechanical chest compression may be employed when trained personnel are not readily available or where manual compression is technically difficult to perform.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1978        PMID: 671684     DOI: 10.1001/jama.240.7.644

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  8 in total

1.  Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Peter L Wang; Steven C Brooks
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-08-20

Review 2.  Part 7: CPR techniques and devices: 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.

Authors:  Diana M Cave; Raul J Gazmuri; Charles W Otto; Vinay M Nadkarni; Adam Cheng; Steven C Brooks; Mohamud Daya; Robert M Sutton; Richard Branson; Mary Fran Hazinski
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Active decompression improves the haemodynamic state during cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Authors:  U M Guly; C E Robertson
Journal:  Br Heart J       Date:  1995-04

Review 4.  Mechanical CPR: Who? When? How?

Authors:  Kurtis Poole; Keith Couper; Michael A Smyth; Joyce Yeung; Gavin D Perkins
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 5.  The Development of Innovative Handheld Devices to Augment Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Therapy and External Cardioversion and Defibrillation.

Authors:  Melanie L Gershman; Brandon S Needelman; Sam N Schwarzwald; Todd J Cohen
Journal:  J Innov Card Rhythm Manag       Date:  2017-12-15

6.  The Use of Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation May Be Associated With Improved Outcomes Over Manual Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation During Inhospital Cardiac Arrests.

Authors:  Conor P Crowley; Emily S Wan; Justin D Salciccioli; Edy Kim
Journal:  Crit Care Explor       Date:  2020-11-16

Review 7.  Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hui Li; Dongping Wang; Yi Yu; Xiang Zhao; Xiaoli Jing
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 2.953

8.  Comparison between manual and mechanical chest compressions during resuscitation in a pediatric animal model of asphyxial cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Jorge López; Sarah N Fernández; Rafael González; María J Solana; Javier Urbano; Blanca Toledo; Jesús López-Herce
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-30       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.