Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2005 Jan-Mar;9(1):61-7.
doi: 10.1080/10903120590891714.

The impact of a new CPR assist device on rate of return of spontaneous circulation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Affiliations
Comparative Study

The impact of a new CPR assist device on rate of return of spontaneous circulation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Michael Casner et al. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2005 Jan-Mar.

Abstract

Objective: The San Francisco Fire Department deployed an automated, load-distributing-band chest compression device (AutoPulse, Revivant Corporation) to evaluate its function in a large urban emergency medical services (EMS) service. A retrospective chart review was undertaken to determine whether the AutoPulse had altered short-term patient outcome, specifically, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC).

Methods: AutoPulse cardiopulmonary resuscitation (A-CPR) was used by paramedic captains responding to adult cardiac arrests with an average +/-SD response time of 15 +/- 5 minutes. The primary endpoint was patient arrival to an emergency department with measurable spontaneous pulses. The manual CPR comparison group was case-matched for age, gender, initial presenting electrocardiogram rhythm, and the number of doses of Advanced Cardiac Life Support medications as a proxy for treatment time. Matching was performed by an investigator blinded to outcome and treatment group.

Results: Sixty-nine AutoPulse uses were matched to 93 manual-CPR-only cases. A-CPR showed improvement in the primary outcome when compared with manual CPR with any presenting rhythm (A-CPR 39%, manual 29%, p = 0.003). When patients were classified by first presenting rhythm, shockable rhythms showed no difference in outcome (A-CPR 44%, manual 50%, p = 0.340). Outcome was improved with A-CPR in initial presenting asystole and approached significance with pulseless electrical activity (PEA)(asystole: A-CPR 37%, manual 22%, p = 0.008; PEA: A-CPR 38%, manual 23%, p = 0.079).

Conclusion: The AutoPulse may improve the overall likelihood of sustained ROSC and may particularly benefit patients with nonshockable rhythms. A prospective randomized trial comparing the AutoPulse with manual CPR in the setting of out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest is under way.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources