Mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation in microgravity and hypergravity conditions: A manikin study during parabolic flight

9Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Introduction: Space travel is expected to grow in the near future, which could lead to a higher burden of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) in astronauts. Current methods to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation in microgravity perform below earth-based standards in terms of depth achieved and the ability to sustain chest compressions (CC). We hypothesised that an automated chest compression device (ACCD) delivers high-quality CC during simulated micro- and hypergravity conditions. Methods: Data on CC depth, rate, release and position utilising an ACCD were collected continuously during a parabolic flight with alternating conditions of normogravity (1 G), hypergravity (1.8 G) and microgravity (0 G), performed on a training manikin fixed in place. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Withney U test were used for comparison purpose. Results: Mechanical CC was performed continuously during the flight; no missed compressions or pauses were recorded. Mean depth of CC showed minimal but statistically significant variations in compression depth during the different phases of the parabolic flight (microgravity 49.9 ± 0.7, normogravity 49.9 ± 0.5 and hypergravity 50.1 ± 0.6 mm, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The use of an ACCD allows continuous delivery of high-quality CC in micro- and hypergravity as experienced in parabolic flight. The decision to bring extra load for a high impact and low likelihood event should be based on specifics of its crew's mission and health status, and the establishment of standard operating procedures.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Forti, A., van Veelen, M. J., Squizzato, T., Dal Cappello, T., Palma, M., & Strapazzon, G. (2022). Mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation in microgravity and hypergravity conditions: A manikin study during parabolic flight. American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 53, 54–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2021.12.056

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free