We Need A Mechanical CPR Device!!!

Category: Cardiology

Title: Mechanical vs. Manual Chest Compressions

Posted: 7/21/2013 by Semhar Tewelde, MD
Click here to contact Semhar Tewelde, MD

• A recent meta–analysis of 12 studies (6,538 patients with 1,824 ROSC) assessed the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) using either manual vs. mechanical (load-distributing or piston-driven) compressions in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
• Compared w/manual CPR, load-distributing band CPR had significantly greater odds of ROSC (odds ratio, 1.62 and p<0.001)
• The treatment effect for piston-driven CPR was similar to manual CPR
• The difference in percentages of ROSC rates from CPR was 8.3% for load-distributing band CPR and 5.2% for piston-driven CPR
• Compared with manual CPR, combining both mechanical CPR devices produced a significant treatment effect in favor of higher odds of ROSC with mechanical CPR devices (odds ratio, 1.53 and p<0.001)

References

Westfall M, Krantz S, Mullin C, Kaufman C. Mechanical versus manual chest compressions in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Crit Care Med 2013 Jul; 41(7):1782-9

LINK to Study