Active compression-decompression resuscitation: a prospective, randomized study in a two-tiered EMS system with physicians in the field

Mauer, D.; Schneider, Thomas; Dick, W.; Withelm, A.; Elich, D.; Mauer, Markus

doi:10.1016/s0300-9572(96)01006-4

Cited by 88 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, 13 randomly controlled trials were included into this meta-analysis involving 2 353 CA patients. [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] Thus 1 252 patients accepted ACD-CRP, and 1 252 received S-CRP ( Figure 1). …”

Section: Searching Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) versus standard CPR for cardiac arrest patients: a meta-analysis

Luo

Zhang

Chen

et al. 2013

World Journal of Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ACD-CPR) has been popular in the treatment of patients with cardiac arrest (CA). However, the effect of ACD-CPR versus conventional standard CPR (S-CRP) is contriversial. This study was to analyze the effi cacy and safety of ACD-CPR versus S-CRP in treating CA patients. METHODS:Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials published from January 1990 to March 2011 were searched with the phrase "active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation and cardiac arrest" in PubMed, EmBASE, and China Biomedical Document Databases. The Cochrane Library was searched for papers of meta-analysis. Restoration of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rate, survival rate to hospital admission, survival rate at 24 hours, and survival rate to hospital discharge were considered primary outcomes, and complications after CPR were viewed as secondary outcomes. Included studies were critically appraised and estimates of effects were calculated according to the model of fi xed or random effects. Inconsistency across the studies was evaluated using the I 2 statistic method. Sensitivity analysis was made to determine statistical heterogeneity. RESULTS:Thirteen studies met the criteria for this meta-analysis. The studies included 396 adult CA patients treated by ACD-CPR and 391 patients by S-CRP. Totally 234 CA patients were found out hospitals, while the other 333 CA patients were in hospitals. Two studies were evaluated with high-quality methodology and the rest 11 studies were of poor quality. ROSC rate, survival rate at 24 hours and survival rate to hospital discharge with favorable neurological function indicated that ACD-CPR is superior to S-CRP, with relative risk (RR) values of 1.39 (95% CI 0.99-1.97), 1.94 (95% CI 1.45-2.59) and 2.80 (95% CI 1. 60-5.24). No significant differences were found in survival rate to hospital admission and survival rate to hospital discharge for ACD-CPR versus S-CRP with RR values of 1.06 (95% CI 0.76-1.60) and 1.00 (95% CI 0.73-1.38).CONCLUSION: Quality controlled studies confirmed the superiority of ACD-CPR to S-CRP in terms of ROSC rate and survival rate at 24 hours. Compared with S-CRP, ACD-CPR could not improve survival rate to hospital admission or survival rate to hospital discharge.

show abstract

Section: Searching Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) versus standard CPR for cardiac arrest patients: a meta-analysis

Luo

Zhang

Chen

et al. 2013

World Journal of Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…12,15,[30][31][32][33] Conversely, other investigations reported no difference in ROSC or survival associated with the use of ACD CPR. [34][35][36][37][38][39][40] Due to the current lack of consensus, the guidelines do not officially recommend for or against ACD CPR use, but do note that the technique can be considered if the user is trained or supervised by trained professionals while using the device. 29 The guidelines also discuss the use of ACD plus ITD CPR and mention studies with varied results.…”

Section: Mechanical Acd Devicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Development of Innovative Handheld Devices to Augment Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Therapy and External Cardioversion and Defibrillation

Gershman

Needelman

Schwarzwald

et al. 2017

J Innov Cardiac Rhythm Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In einigen klinischen Studien verbesserte ACD-CPR im Vergleich zur manuellen CPR die Hämodynamik [542,544,545,546], in anderen dagegen nicht [547]. In 3 randomisierten Studien [546,548,549] verbesserte die ACD-CPR das Langzeit-Outcome nach präklinischem Kreislaufstillstand; in 5 anderen randomisierten Studien führte ACD-CPR zu keiner Verbesserung des Outcome [550,551,552,553,554]. Die Effektivität der ACD-CPR hängt vermutlich stark von der Qualität der Durchführung und dem Trainingsgrad der Anwender ab [555].…”

Section: Reanimatiom Mithilfe Aktiver Kompression-dekompressionunclassified

Erweiterte Reanimationsmaßnahmen für Erwachsene („advanced life support“)

Deakin

Nolan

Soar

et al. 2010

Notfall Rettungsmed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Active compression-decompression resuscitation: a prospective, randomized study in a two-tiered EMS system with physicians in the field

Cited by 88 publications

References 35 publications

Active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) versus standard CPR for cardiac arrest patients: a meta-analysis

Active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) versus standard CPR for cardiac arrest patients: a meta-analysis

The Development of Innovative Handheld Devices to Augment Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Therapy and External Cardioversion and Defibrillation

Erweiterte Reanimationsmaßnahmen für Erwachsene („advanced life support“)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About