English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyze the quality of chest compressions in different working situations pertaining to ambulance crews using either standard chest compressions (S-CC) or LUCAS mechanical chest compressions (L-CC) in a manikin setting. Participants and Methods: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was performed using a compression to ventilation ratio of 30:2 with both S-CC and L-CC. Quality parameters were collected using a modified manikin enabling impedance measurements. The evaluation was performed in two manikin scenarios: Scenario 1 evaluated ten minutes of CPR on the ground and Scenario 2 assessed six minutes of CPR in different settings relevant to work in the ambulance. Quality parameters compared were: time to apply LUCAS, hands-off fraction, number of correct chest compressions and the rate of compressions. Results: In Scenario 1 the hands-off fraction was higher when S-CC was performed (S-CC group 29% vs. L-CC 16%, P = 0.003). We found a higher number of chest compressions (S-CC = 913 vs. L-CC = 831, P = 0.0049) and a higher rate of chest compressions (S-CC = 118 vs. L-CC = 99, P < 0.0001) in the S-CC group. In Scenario 2 we noted a higher hands-off fraction for S-CC (39% vs. L-CC = 19%, P = 0.003), but a higher number of compressions given during S-CC ((n = 504) vs. L-CC (n = 396) P = 0.0002). Conclusion: Mechanical chest compression with the LUCAS 2TM device enables ambulance personnel to provide high quality chest compression even while transporting the patient.

A Chest Compression Quality Evaluation Using Mechanical Chest Compressions under Different Working Situations in the Ambulance