Background Dispatcher assistance can help to save lives during layperson cardiopulmonary resuscitation during cardiac arrest. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of different camera positions on the evaluation of cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance during video-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Methods For this randomized, controlled simulation trial, seven video sequences of cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance were recorded from three different camera positions: side, foot and head position. Video sequences showed either correct cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance or one of the six typical errors: low and high compression rate, superficial and increased compression depth, wrong hand position or incomplete release. Video sequences with different cardiopulmonary resuscitation performances and camera positions were randomly combined such that each evaluator was presented seven individual combinations of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and camera position and evaluated each cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance once. A total of 46 paramedics and 47 emergency physicians evaluated seven video sequences of cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance from different camera positions. The primary hypothesis was that there are differences in accuracy of correct assessment/error recognition depending on camera perspective. Generalized linear multi-level analyses assuming a binomial distribution and a logit link were employed to account for the dependency between each evaluator's seven ratings. Results Of 651 video sequences, cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance was evaluable in 96.8% and correctly evaluated in 74.5% over all camera positions. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance was classified correctly from a side perspective in 81.3%, from a foot perspective in 68.8% and from a head perspective in 73.6%, revealing a significant difference in error recognition depending on the camera perspective ( p = .01). Correct cardiopulmonary resuscitation was mistakenly evaluated to be false in 46.2% over all perspectives. Conclusions Participants were able to recognize significantly more mistakes when the camera was located on the opposite side of the cardiopulmonary resuscitation provider. Foot position should be avoided in order to enable the dispatcher the best possible view to evaluating cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality.
Background Although not routinely established during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), video-assisted CPR has been described as beneficial in the communication with emergency medical service (EMS) authorities in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest scenarios. Since the influence of video quality has not been investigated systematically and due to variation of quality of a live-stream video during video-assisted CPR, we investigated the influence of different video quality levels during the evaluation of CPR performance in video sequences. Methods Seven video sequences of CPR performance were recorded in high quality and artificially reduced to medium and low quality afterwards. Video sequences showed either correct CPR performance or one of six typical errors: too low and too high compression rate, superficial and increased compression depth, wrong hand position and incomplete release. Video sequences were randomly assigned to the different quality levels. During the randomised and double-blinded evaluation process, 46 paramedics and 47 emergency physicians evaluated seven video sequences of CPR performance in different quality levels (high, medium and low resolution). Results Of 650 video sequences, CPR performance was evaluable in 98.2%. CPR performance was correctly evaluated in 71.5% at low quality, in 76.8% at medium quality, and in 77.3% at high quality level, showing no significant differences depending on video quality (p = 0.306). In the subgroup analysis, correct classification of increased compression depth showed significant differences depending on video quality (p = 0.006). Further, there were significant differences in correct CPR classification depending on the presented error (p < 0.001). Allegedly errors, that were not shown in the video sequence, were classified in 28.3%, insignificantly depending on video quality. Correct evaluation did not show significant interprofessional differences (p = 0.468). Conclusion Video quality has no significant impact on the evaluation of CPR in a video sequence. Even low video quality leads to an acceptable rate of correct evaluation of CPR performance. There is a significant difference in evaluation of CPR performance depending on the presented error in a video sequence. Trial registration German Clinical Trial Register (Registration number DRKS00015297) Registered on 2018-08-21.
Introduction: Video-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (V-CPR) describes an advanced telephone-assisted CPR (T-CPR), in which emergency medical service (EMS) dispatchers view a live video steam of the resuscitation. Dispatchers ’ general attitudes toward and self-assessment in V-CPR have not been previously investigated. Material and Methods: We conducted this quantitative analysis along with a pilot study on V-CPR. After conducting V-CPR with laypersons in a simulation, EMS dispatchers were given questionnaires with 21 items concerning their personal attitude toward V-CPR and their self-assessment in providing instructions. The actual CPR performance achieved was recorded and compared to the dispatchers’ self-assessments. Results: Dispatchers completed 49 questionnaires, and the data is presented descriptively. Over 80% strongly agreed that V-CPR was helpful in guiding and that their feedback improved CPR quality. Fifty-one percent agreed that video images supported them in making a diagnosis, while 44.9% disagreed. A vast majority (80-90% each) strongly agreed that V-CPR helped them recognize CPR issues such as compression point, compression rate, and deterioration. In contrast, data for improved compression depth and release were weaker. Thirty percent found V-CPR to be more stressful or exhausting than T-CPR. A majority stated they would prefer V-CPR as an addition to T-CPR in the future. There was a huge gap between dispatchers’ own view of CPR effort and measured CPR quality. Conclusion: Dispatchers generally embrace V-CPR and praise the abilities it provides. Our results indicate that the use of V-CPR did not automatically result in an overall improvement in guideline-compliant CPR quality.
Background In this retrospective routine data analysis, we investigate the number of emergency department (ED) consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 in Germany compared to the previous year with a special focus on numbers of myocardial infarction and acute heart failure. Methods Aggregated case numbers for the two consecutive years 2019 and 2020 were obtained from 24 university hospitals and 9 non-university hospitals in Germany and assessed by age, gender, triage scores, disposition, care level and by ICD-10 codes including the tracer diagnoses myocardial infarction (I21) and heart failure (I50). Results A total of 2,216,627 ED consultations were analyzed, of which 1,178,470 occurred in 2019 and 1,038,157 in 2020. The median deviation in case numbers between 2019 and 2020 was − 14% [CI (− 11)–(− 16)]. After a marked drop in all cases in the first COVID-19 wave in spring 2020, case numbers normalized during the summer. Thereafter starting in calendar week 39 case numbers constantly declined until the end of the year 2020. The decline in case numbers predominantly concerned younger [− 16%; CI (− 13)–(− 19)], less urgent [− 18%; CI (− 12)–(− 22)] and non-admitted cases [− 17%; CI (− 13)–(− 20)] in particular during the second wave. During the entire observation period admissions for chest pain [− 13%; CI (− 21)–2], myocardial infarction [− 2%; CI (− 9)–11] and heart failure [− 2%; CI (− 10)–6] were less affected and remained comparable to the previous year. Conclusions ED visits were noticeably reduced during both SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves in Germany but cardiovascular diagnoses were less affected and no refractory increase was noted. However, long-term effects cannot be ruled out and need to be analysed in future studies. Graphical abstract
The measurement of the liver function via the plasma disappearance rate of indocyanine green (PDRICG) is a sensitive bed-side tool in critical care. Yet, recent evidence has questioned the value of this method for hyperdynamic conditions. To evaluate this technique in different hemodynamic settings, we analyzed the PDRICG and corresponding pharmacokinetic models after endotoxemia or hemorrhagic shock in rats. Male anesthetized Sprague-Dawley rats underwent hemorrhage (mean arterial pressure 35 ± 5 mmHg, 90 min) and 2 h of reperfusion, or lipopolysaccharide (LPS) induced moderate or severe (1.0 vs. 10 mg/kg) endotoxemia for 6 h (each n = 6). Afterwards, PDRICG was measured, and pharmacokinetic models were analyzed using nonlinear mixed effects modeling (NONMEM®). Hemorrhagic shock resulted in a significant decrease of PDRICG, compared with sham controls, and a corresponding attenuation of the calculated ICG clearance in 1- and 2-compartment models, with the same log-likelihood. The induction of severe, but not moderate endotoxemia, led to a significant reduction of PDRICG. The calculated ICG blood clearance was reduced in 1-compartment models for both septic conditions. 2-compartment models performed with a significantly better log likelihood, and the calculated clearance of ICG did not correspond well with PDRICG in both LPS groups. 3-compartment models did not improve the log likelihood in any experiment. These results demonstrate that PDRICG correlates well with ICG clearance in 1- and 2-compartment models after hemorrhage. In endotoxemia, best described by a 2-compartment model, PDRICG may not truly reflect the ICG clearance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.