Cargando…
Mechanical CPR devices compared to manual CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and ambulance transport: a systematic review
AIMS: The aim of this paper was to conduct a systematic review of the published literature to address the question: “In pre-hospital adult cardiac arrest (asystole, pulseless electrical activity, pulseless Ventricular Tachycardia and Ventricular Fibrillation), does the use of mechanical Cardio-Pulmo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3416709/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22709917 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-20-39 |
_version_ | 1782240428252200960 |
---|---|
author | Ong, Marcus Eng Hock Mackey, Kevin E Zhang, Zhong Cheng Tanaka, Hideharu Ma, Matthew Huei-Ming Swor, Robert Shin, Sang Do |
author_facet | Ong, Marcus Eng Hock Mackey, Kevin E Zhang, Zhong Cheng Tanaka, Hideharu Ma, Matthew Huei-Ming Swor, Robert Shin, Sang Do |
author_sort | Ong, Marcus Eng Hock |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS: The aim of this paper was to conduct a systematic review of the published literature to address the question: “In pre-hospital adult cardiac arrest (asystole, pulseless electrical activity, pulseless Ventricular Tachycardia and Ventricular Fibrillation), does the use of mechanical Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) devices compared to manual CPR during Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest and ambulance transport, improve outcomes (e.g. Quality of CPR, Return Of Spontaneous Circulation, Survival)”. METHODS: Databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library (including Cochrane database for systematic reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Embase, and AHA EndNote Master Library were systematically searched. Further references were gathered from cross-references from articles and reviews as well as forward search using SCOPUS and Google scholar. The inclusion criteria for this review included manikin and human studies of adult cardiac arrest and anti-arrhythmic agents, peer-review. Excluded were review articles, case series and case reports. RESULTS: Out of 88 articles identified, only 10 studies met the inclusion criteria for further review. Of these 10 articles, 1 was Level of Evidence (LOE) 1, 4 LOE 2, 3 LOE 3, 0 LOE 4, 2 LOE 5. 4 studies evaluated the quality of CPR in terms of compression adequacy while the remaining six studies evaluated on clinical outcomes in terms of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital admission, survival to discharge and Cerebral Performance Categories (CPC). 7 studies were supporting the clinical question, 1 neutral and 2 opposing. CONCLUSION: In this review, we found insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of mechanical CPR devices in settings of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and during ambulance transport. While there is some low quality evidence suggesting that mechanical CPR can improve consistency and reduce interruptions in chest compressions, there is no evidence that mechanical CPR devices improve survival, to the contrary they may worsen neurological outcome. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3416709 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-34167092012-08-11 Mechanical CPR devices compared to manual CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and ambulance transport: a systematic review Ong, Marcus Eng Hock Mackey, Kevin E Zhang, Zhong Cheng Tanaka, Hideharu Ma, Matthew Huei-Ming Swor, Robert Shin, Sang Do Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Review AIMS: The aim of this paper was to conduct a systematic review of the published literature to address the question: “In pre-hospital adult cardiac arrest (asystole, pulseless electrical activity, pulseless Ventricular Tachycardia and Ventricular Fibrillation), does the use of mechanical Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) devices compared to manual CPR during Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest and ambulance transport, improve outcomes (e.g. Quality of CPR, Return Of Spontaneous Circulation, Survival)”. METHODS: Databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library (including Cochrane database for systematic reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Embase, and AHA EndNote Master Library were systematically searched. Further references were gathered from cross-references from articles and reviews as well as forward search using SCOPUS and Google scholar. The inclusion criteria for this review included manikin and human studies of adult cardiac arrest and anti-arrhythmic agents, peer-review. Excluded were review articles, case series and case reports. RESULTS: Out of 88 articles identified, only 10 studies met the inclusion criteria for further review. Of these 10 articles, 1 was Level of Evidence (LOE) 1, 4 LOE 2, 3 LOE 3, 0 LOE 4, 2 LOE 5. 4 studies evaluated the quality of CPR in terms of compression adequacy while the remaining six studies evaluated on clinical outcomes in terms of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital admission, survival to discharge and Cerebral Performance Categories (CPC). 7 studies were supporting the clinical question, 1 neutral and 2 opposing. CONCLUSION: In this review, we found insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of mechanical CPR devices in settings of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and during ambulance transport. While there is some low quality evidence suggesting that mechanical CPR can improve consistency and reduce interruptions in chest compressions, there is no evidence that mechanical CPR devices improve survival, to the contrary they may worsen neurological outcome. BioMed Central 2012-06-18 /pmc/articles/PMC3416709/ /pubmed/22709917 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-20-39 Text en Copyright ©2012 Ong et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Ong, Marcus Eng Hock Mackey, Kevin E Zhang, Zhong Cheng Tanaka, Hideharu Ma, Matthew Huei-Ming Swor, Robert Shin, Sang Do Mechanical CPR devices compared to manual CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and ambulance transport: a systematic review |
title | Mechanical CPR devices compared to manual CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and ambulance transport: a systematic review |
title_full | Mechanical CPR devices compared to manual CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and ambulance transport: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Mechanical CPR devices compared to manual CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and ambulance transport: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Mechanical CPR devices compared to manual CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and ambulance transport: a systematic review |
title_short | Mechanical CPR devices compared to manual CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and ambulance transport: a systematic review |
title_sort | mechanical cpr devices compared to manual cpr during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and ambulance transport: a systematic review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3416709/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22709917 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1757-7241-20-39 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ongmarcusenghock mechanicalcprdevicescomparedtomanualcprduringoutofhospitalcardiacarrestandambulancetransportasystematicreview AT mackeykevine mechanicalcprdevicescomparedtomanualcprduringoutofhospitalcardiacarrestandambulancetransportasystematicreview AT zhangzhongcheng mechanicalcprdevicescomparedtomanualcprduringoutofhospitalcardiacarrestandambulancetransportasystematicreview AT tanakahideharu mechanicalcprdevicescomparedtomanualcprduringoutofhospitalcardiacarrestandambulancetransportasystematicreview AT mamatthewhueiming mechanicalcprdevicescomparedtomanualcprduringoutofhospitalcardiacarrestandambulancetransportasystematicreview AT sworrobert mechanicalcprdevicescomparedtomanualcprduringoutofhospitalcardiacarrestandambulancetransportasystematicreview AT shinsangdo mechanicalcprdevicescomparedtomanualcprduringoutofhospitalcardiacarrestandambulancetransportasystematicreview |