 |
|
Use of an Automated, Load-Distributing Band Chest Compression Device for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Resuscitation
Marcus Eng Hock Ong, MD, MPH;
Joseph P. Ornato, MD;
David P. Edwards, MBA, EMT-P;
Harinder S. Dhindsa, MD, MPH;
Al M. Best, PhD;
Caesar S. Ines, MD, MS;
Scott Hickey, MD;
Bryan Clark, DO;
Dean C. Williams, MD;
Robert G. Powell, MD;
Jerry L. Overton, MPA;
Mary Ann Peberdy, MD
JAMA. 2006;295:2629-2637.
Context Only 1% to 8% of adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survive to hospital discharge.
Objective To compare resuscitation outcomes before and after an urban emergency medical services (EMS) system switched from manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to load-distributing band (LDB) CPR.
Design, Setting, and Patients A phased, observational cohort evaluation with intention-to-treat analysis of 783 adults with out-of-hospital, nontraumatic cardiac arrest. A total of 499 patients were included in the manual CPR phase (January 1, 2001, to March 31, 2003) and 284 patients in the LDB-CPR phase (December 20, 2003, to March 31, 2005); of these patients, the LDB device was applied in 210 patients.
Intervention Urban EMS system change from manual CPR to LDB-CPR.
Main Outcome Measures Return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), with secondary outcome measures of survival to hospital admission and hospital discharge, and neurological outcome at discharge.
Results Patients in the manual CPR and LDB-CPR phases were comparable except for a faster response time interval (mean difference, 26 seconds) and more EMS-witnessed arrests (18.7% vs 12.6%) with LDB. Rates for ROSC and survival were increased with LDB-CPR compared with manual CPR (for ROSC, 34.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 29.2%-40.3% vs 20.2%; 95% CI, 16.9%-24.0%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.94; 95% CI, 1.38-2.72; for survival to hospital admission, 20.9%; 95% CI, 16.6%-26.1% vs 11.1%; 95% CI, 8.6%-14.2%; adjusted OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.23-2.86; and for survival to hospital discharge, 9.7%; 95% CI, 6.7%-13.8% vs 2.9%; 95% CI, 1.7%-4.8%; adjusted OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.11-4.77). In secondary analysis of the 210 patients in whom the LDB device was applied, 38 patients (18.1%) survived to hospital admission (95% CI, 13.4%-23.9%) and 12 patients (5.7%) survived to hospital discharge (95% CI, 3.0%-9.3%). Among patients in the manual CPR and LDB-CPR groups who survived to hospital discharge, there was no significant difference between groups in Cerebral Performance Category (P = .36) or Overall Performance Category (P = .40). The number needed to treat for the adjusted outcome survival to discharge was 15 (95% CI, 9-33).
Conclusion Compared with resuscitation using manual CPR, a resuscitation strategy using LDB-CPR on EMS ambulances is associated with improved survival to hospital discharge in adults with out-of-hospital nontraumatic cardiac arrest.
Author Affiliations: Departments of Epidemiology and Community Health (Dr Ong) and Biostatistics (Dr Best), Virginia Commonwealth University, and Department of Emergency Medicine (Drs Ong, Dhindsa, Ines, and Hickey), Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Cardiology (Dr Peberdy), and Department of Emergency Medicine and the Virginia Commonwealth University Reanimation, Engineering, and Shock Center (Drs Ornato and Peberdy), Virginia Commonwealth University Health System; The Richmond Ambulance Authority (Messrs Edwards and Overton); Department of Emergency Medicine, Chippenham & Johnston-Willis Hospital (Dr Clark); Department of Emergency Medicine, Richmond Community Hospital (Dr Williams); and Department of Emergency Medicine, St Mary's Hospital (Dr Powell), Richmond.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLES
Manual Chest Compression vs Use of an Automated Chest Compression Device During Resuscitation Following Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Randomized Trial
Al Hallstrom, Thomas D. Rea, Michael R. Sayre, James Christenson, Andy R. Anton, Vince N. Mosesso, Jr, Lois Van Ottingham, Michele Olsufka, Sarah Pennington, Lynn J. White, Stephen Yahn, James Husar, Mary F. Morris, and Leonard A. Cobb
JAMA. 2006;295(22):2620-2628.
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
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
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: History, Current Practice, and Future Direction
Cooper et al.
Circulation 2006;114:2839-2849.
FULL TEXT
Sophia
Unwin and Wyatt
Emerg. Med. J. 2006;23:820-820.
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
|
