Abstract
Objective: High-quality chest-compressions are of paramount importance for survival and good neurological outcome after cardiac arrest. However, even healthcare professionals have difficulty performing effective chest-compressions, and quality may be further reduced during transport. We compared a mechanical chest-compression device (Lund University Cardiac Assist System [LUCAS]; Jolife, Lund, Sweden) and manual chest-compressions in a simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation scenario during helicopter rescue. Methods: Twenty-five advanced life support-certified paramedics were enrolled for this prospective, randomized, crossover study. A modified Resusci Anne manikin was employed. Thirty minutes of training was allotted to both LUCAS and manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Thereafter, every candidate performed the same scenario twice, once with LUCAS and once with manual CPR. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of correct chest-compressions relative to total chest-compressions. Results: LUCAS compared to manual chest-compressions were more frequently correct (99% vs 59%, P
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Putzer, G., Braun, P., Zimmermann, A., Pedross, F., Strapazzon, G., Brugger, H., & Paal, P. (2013). LUCAS compared to manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation is more effective during helicopter rescue - A prospective, randomized, cross-over manikin study. American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 31(2), 384–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2012.07.018
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.