 |
|
Manual Chest Compression vs Use of an Automated Chest Compression Device During Resuscitation Following Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
A Randomized Trial
Al Hallstrom, PhD;
Thomas D. Rea, MD, MPH;
Michael R. Sayre, MD;
James Christenson, MD;
Andy R. Anton, MD;
Vince N. Mosesso, Jr, MD;
Lois Van Ottingham, BSN;
Michele Olsufka, RN;
Sarah Pennington, RN;
Lynn J. White, MS;
Stephen Yahn, EMT-P;
James Husar, EMT-P;
Mary F. Morris;
Leonard A. Cobb, MD
JAMA. 2006;295:2620-2628.
Context High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) may improve both cardiac and brain resuscitation following cardiac arrest. Compared with manual chest compression, an automated load-distributing band (LDB) chest compression device produces greater blood flow to vital organs and may improve resuscitation outcomes.
Objective To compare resuscitation outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest when an automated LDB-CPR device was added to standard emergency medical services (EMS) care with manual CPR.
Design, Setting, and Patients Multicenter, randomized trial of patients experiencing out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the United States and Canada. The a priori primary population was patients with cardiac arrest that was presumed to be of cardiac origin and that had occurred prior to the arrival of EMS personnel. Initial study enrollment varied by site, ranging from late July to mid November 2004; all sites halted study enrollment on March 31, 2005.
Intervention Standard EMS care for cardiac arrest with an LDB-CPR device (n = 554) or manual CPR (n = 517).
Main Outcome Measures The primary end point was survival to 4 hours after the 911 call. Secondary end points were survival to hospital discharge and neurological status among survivors.
Results Following the first planned interim monitoring conducted by an independent data and safety monitoring board, study enrollment was terminated. No difference existed in the primary end point of survival to 4 hours between the manual CPR group and the LDB-CPR group overall (N = 1071; 29.5% vs 28.5%; P = .74) or among the primary study population (n = 767; 24.7% vs 26.4%, respectively; P = .62). However, among the primary population, survival to hospital discharge was 9.9% in the manual CPR group and 5.8% in the LDB-CPR group (P = .06, adjusted for covariates and clustering). A cerebral performance category of 1 or 2 at hospital discharge was recorded in 7.5% of patients in the manual CPR group and in 3.1% of the LDB-CPR group (P = .006).
Conclusions Use of an automated LDB-CPR device as implemented in this study was associated with worse neurological outcomes and a trend toward worse survival than manual CPR. Device design or implementation strategies require further evaluation.
Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00120965
Author Affiliations: Departments of Biostatistics (Dr Hallstrom and Mss Van Ottingham and Morris) and Medicine (Drs Rea and Cobb and Ms Olsufka), University of Washington, Seattle; Department of Emergency Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus (Dr Sayre and Ms White); British Columbia Ambulance Service, Vancouver (Dr Christenson); Calgary Emergency Medical Services, Calgary, Alberta (Dr Anton and Mr Yahn); Department of Emergency Medicine (Dr Mosesso and Mr Husar), School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa; and St Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia (Ms Pennington).
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLES
Use of an Automated, Load-Distributing Band Chest Compression Device for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Resuscitation
Marcus Eng Hock Ong, Joseph P. Ornato, David P. Edwards, Harinder S. Dhindsa, Al M. Best, Caesar S. Ines, Scott Hickey, Bryan Clark, Dean C. Williams, Robert G. Powell, Jerry L. Overton, and Mary Ann Peberdy
JAMA. 2006;295(22):2629-2637.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Manual vs Device-Assisted CPR: Reconciling Apparently Contradictory Results
Roger J. Lewis and James T. Niemann
JAMA. 2006;295(22):2661-2664.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Improving the Outcome of In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: The Importance of Being EARNEST
Dichtwald et al.
SEMIN CARDIOTHORAC VASC ANESTH 2009;13:19-30.
ABSTRACT
Thrombolysis during Resuscitation for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
Bottiger et al.
NEJM 2008;359:2651-2662.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Improving In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Process and Outcomes With Performance Debriefing
Edelson et al.
Arch Intern Med 2008;168:1063-1069.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Hands-On Defibrillation: An Analysis of Electrical Current Flow Through Rescuers in Direct Contact With Patients During Biphasic External Defibrillation
Lloyd et al.
Circulation 2008;117:2510-2514.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Scientific Knowledge Gaps and Clinical Research Priorities for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Identified During the 2005 International Consensus Conference on ECC and CPR Science With Treatment Recommendations: A Consensus Statement From the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (American Heart Association, Australian Resuscitation Council, European Resuscitation Council, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, InterAmerican Heart Foundation, Resuscitation Council of Southern Africa, and the New Zealand Resuscitation Council); the American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee; the Stroke Council; and the Cardiovascular Nursing Council
Gazmuri et al.
Circulation 2007;116:2501-2512.
FULL TEXT
Narrative Review: Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care: Review of the Current Guidelines
Ali and Zafari
ANN INTERN MED 2007;147:171-179.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Update in Critical Care 2006
Milbrandt et al.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2007;175:638-648.
FULL TEXT
Acute management of sudden cardiac death in adults based upon the new CPR guidelines
Yannopoulos and Aufderheide
Europace 2007;9:2-9.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: History, Current Practice, and Future Direction
Cooper et al.
Circulation 2006;114:2839-2849.
FULL TEXT
Other articles noted
Evid. Based Med. 2006;11:159-160.
FULL TEXT
Manual vs. Automated Chest Compression in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Resuscitation
JWatch General 2006;2006:3-3.
FULL TEXT
Chest Compression Device Improves Survival in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest . . . or Does It?
JWatch Emergency Med. 2006;2006:7-7.
FULL TEXT
Device-Assisted Out-of-Hospital CPR: Two Studies
Journal Watch Cardiology 2006;2006:4-4.
FULL TEXT
Manual vs device-assisted CPR: reconciling apparently contradictory results.
Lewis and Niemann
JAMA 2006;295:2661-2664.
FULL TEXT
|
