Quality of mechanical, manual standard and active compression-decompression CPR on the arrest site and during transport in a manikin model

Ullevål University Hospital, Institute for Experimental Medical Research, Oslo, Norway.
Resuscitation (Impact Factor: 3.96). 07/1997; 34(3):235-42. DOI: 10.1016/S0300-9572(96)01087-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The quality of mechanical CPR (M-CPR) was compared with manual standard CPR (S-CPR) and active compression-decompression CPR (ACD-CPR) performed by paramedics on the site of a cardiac arrest and during manual and ambulance transport. Each technique was performed 12 times on manikins using teams from a group of 12 paramedic students with good clinical CPR experience using a random cross-over design. Except for some lost ventilations the CPR effort using the mechanical device adhered to the European Resuscitation Council guidelines, with an added time requirement of median 40 s for attaching the device compared with manual standard CPR. Throughout the study, in comparison with mechanical CPR the quality of CPR with either manual method was significantly worse. In particular, there were considerable individual variations during stretcher transport. With S-CPR and ACD-CPR the median compression times were 38 and 31%, significantly lower than the recommended 50%, and 46-98% of the decompression efforts with ACD-CPR were too weak, particularly during transport on the stairs. With both manual methods, there were no significant differences in the CPR effort between the site of the arrest and the ambulance transport. However, compression rates were reduced and became more erratic during stretcher transport to the ambulance. When walking horizontally, a median of 19% of S-CPR compressions and 84% of ACD-CPR compressions were to weak. On the stairs, 68% of S-CPR compressions and 100% of ACD-CPR compressions were too weak. In conclusion, when evaluated on a manikin, in comparison with manual standard and ACD-CPR, mechanical CPR adhered more closely to ERC guidelines. This was particularly true when performing CPR during transport on a stretcher.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Whereas there is clear evidence for improved survival with cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and defibrillation during cardiac arrest management, there is today lacking evidence that any of the recommended and used drugs lead to any long-term benefit for the patients. In this review, we try to discuss our current view on why advanced life support (ALS) today can be performed without the use of drugs, and instead gain all focus on improving the tasks we know improve survival: CPR and defibrillation. Previous and recent cardiac arrest drug studies have been reviewed. These are mostly consisting of retrospective register data, some experimental data and a few new randomized trials. The alternative drug-free ALS concept is also discussed with relevant studies. There is currently no evidence to support any specific drugs during cardiac arrest. Good-quality CPR, early defibrillation and goal-directed postresuscitation care is more important. Healthcare systems should not prioritize implementation of unproven drugs before good quality of care can be documented. More drug studies are indeed required, and future research needs to incorporate better diagnostic tools to test more specific and tailored therapies that account for underlying causes and individual responsiveness.
    Current opinion in critical care 04/2014; DOI:10.1097/MCC.0000000000000082 · 3.18 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The "2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care" increased the focus on methods to ensure that high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is performed in all resuscitation attempts. There are 5 critical components of high-quality CPR: minimize interruptions in chest compressions, provide compressions of adequate rate and depth, avoid leaning between compressions, and avoid excessive ventilation. Although it is clear that high-quality CPR is the primary component in influencing survival from cardiac arrest, there is considerable variation in monitoring, implementation, and quality improvement. As such, CPR quality varies widely between systems and locations. Victims often do not receive high-quality CPR because of provider ambiguity in prioritization of resuscitative efforts during an arrest. This ambiguity also impedes the development of optimal systems of care to increase survival from cardiac arrest. This consensus statement addresses the following key areas of CPR quality for the trained rescuer: metrics of CPR performance; monitoring, feedback, and integration of the patient's response to CPR; team-level logistics to ensure performance of high-quality CPR; and continuous quality improvement on provider, team, and systems levels. Clear definitions of metrics and methods to consistently deliver and improve the quality of CPR will narrow the gap between resuscitation science and the victims, both in and out of the hospital, and lay the foundation for further improvements in the future.
    Circulation 06/2013; 128(4). DOI:10.1161/CIR.0b013e31829d8654 · 14.95 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: High energy trauma is rare and, as a result, training of prehospital care providers often takes place during the real situation, with the patient as the object for the learning process. Such training could instead be carried out in the context of simulation, out of danger for both patients and personnel. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the development and foci of research on simulation in prehospital care practice. An integrative literature review were used. Articles based on quantitative as well as qualitative research methods were included, resulting in a comprehensive overview of existing published research. For published articles to be included in the review, the focus of the article had to be prehospital care providers, in prehospital settings. Furthermore, included articles must target interventions that were carried out in a simulation context. The volume of published research is distributed between 1984- 2012 and across the regions North America, Europe, Oceania, Asia and Middle East. The simulation methods used were manikins, films, images or paper, live actors, animals and virtual reality. The staff categories focused upon were paramedics, emergency medical technicians (EMTs), medical doctors (MDs), nurse and fire fighters. The main topics of published research on simulation with prehospital care providers included: Intubation, Trauma care, Cardiac Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), Ventilation and Triage. Simulation were described as a positive training and education method for prehospital medical staff. It provides opportunities to train assessment, treatment and implementation of procedures and devices under realistic conditions. It is crucial that the staff are familiar with and trained on the identified topics, i.e., intubation, trauma care, CPR, ventilation and triage, which all, to a very large degree, constitute prehospital care. Simulation plays an integral role in this. The current state of prehospital care, which this review reveals, includes inadequate skills of prehospital staff regarding ventilation and CPR, on both children and adults, the lack of skills in paediatric resuscitation and the lack of knowledge in assessing and managing burns victims. These circumstances suggest critical areas for further training and research, at both local and global levels.
    Scandinavian Journal of Trauma Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine 03/2014; 22(1):22. DOI:10.1186/1757-7241-22-22 · 1.93 Impact Factor