This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Eric M. Rottenberg, AASEMST
The Ohio State University Medical Center Columbus

JAMA. 1996;276(6):448-449.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—Dr Stiell and colleagues¹ published a study comparing the effect of active compression-decompression (ACD) cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and standard CPR on outcomes of in-hospital and out-of-hospital victims of cardiac arrest. They concluded that ACD CPR did not improve survival or neurologic outcomes in any group of patients with cardiac arrest. However, testing ACD CPR in a system in which the ambulance services did not have the capability for endotracheal intubation is biased against successful application of ACD CPR. Since previous animal studies tested the method under conditions that included endotracheal intubation, it is a significant methodological error not to control for intubation.

Intubation is an integral part of CPR research because, among other advantages, it ensures a patent airway and allows air to move freely in and out of the lungs. The ACD CPR technique involves the use of a suction-cup device applied to the sternum . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?