Barrier resuscitation by lay rescuers during COVID-19 pandemic

Lederer, Wolfgang; Isser, Markus

doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2021.110648

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Presumably, the strong hydrophobicity of plastic foils may have additional effects on infectious secretions beside the barrier function 8 . Foils may even reduce revulsion, thus increasing the readiness of lay rescuers to perform CPR 9 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thin foil body-shield resuscitation barrier device to protect from blood: an experimental study

Hermann

Isser²,

Bilgeri

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In times of collective concern about pandemics, body-shield resuscitation barrier devices are more and more considered to protect against transmission of different pathogens between rescuers and patients. The objective of this experimental study was to investigate the characteristics of blood drops dispersed on the surface of four different foils suitable for blanketing patients during resuscitation. We analyzed run-off characteristics of blood stains depending on surface properties of polyvinyl chloride, polyethylene, polyethylene terephthalate and aluminum-coated polyethylene terephthalate. Confocal fluorescence microscopy revealed less cellular density and lack of fibrin networks in blood stains on the four foil surfaces than on paper towel. Delayed clotting went along with larger areas of contamination indicating a greater likelihood of coming into contact with potential germs but a smaller chance of contracting an infection. Space blankets as obligatory components of first aid kits are readily available for rescuers and serve as a mechanical barrier between rescuers and patients during resuscitation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thin foil body-shield resuscitation barrier device to protect from blood: an experimental study

Hermann

Isser²,

Bilgeri

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The cause was the rescuer's fear of contracting COVID-19. In addition, a study found that the tendency to resuscitate in cardiac arrest patients was reduced, leading to an increase in mortality [5], [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Viability of Using Remote Controlled Mechanical Chest Compression Devices to Reduce Contamination in Cardiac Arrest Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Apiratwarakul

Cheung²,

Bhudhisawasdi³

et al. 2022

Open Access Maced J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Mechanical chest compression devices play an important role in assisting patients undergoing cardiac arrest. However, this equipment induces an aerosol-generating procedure that could contaminate hospital staff. The development of a remote control system for mechanical chest compression devices may solve the problem; however, there are currently no studies regarding the efficacy of this system. AIM: This study aims to analyze efficacy of remote control systems for mechanical chest compression devices and compare it with non-remote control systems. METHODS: This was an analytical cross-sectional study at Srinagarind Hospital, Thailand. Data were collected in two periods of the study. The first period was between January and December 2021 using a non-remote control system to operate the mechanical chest compression device. The second period was from January to April 2022 and collected data on the use of a remote control system. RESULTS: Sixty-four participants were examined over the 16-month period of the study. A total of 53.1% (n = 34) of participants were male and the mean age of the patients was 52.4 ± 5.1 years old. The number of emergency medical service members (EMS) needed for resuscitation in the remote control group was less than the non-remote control group (3 vs. 5; p = 0.040). The number of emergency department (ED) members needed for resuscitation in the remote control group was four compared with eight in the non-remote control group. CONCLUSIONS: The remote controlled mechanical chest compression device can effectively reduce the number of staff working both in the EMS and in the ED of the hospital, thus reducing exposure and contamination from aerosol-generating procedure. It was also proven accurate in terms of rate and depth of chest compression according to resuscitation guidelines.

show abstract

“…In BLS settings, this option is limited by the availability of medical equipment (self-expanding bag, face mask). Beside some specialized equipment, including that invented by Lederer and Isser for a barrier resuscitation provided by laypersons [ 12 ], respirators with optimal protection (greater than 95% FFP2 or FFP3) could yield the possibility of rescuer protection in combination with effective breath delivery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility of Mouth-to-Mouth Ventilation through FFP2 Respirator in BLS Training during COVID-19 Pandemic (MOVERESP Study): Simulation-Based Study

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Basic Life Support (BLS) training has been limited to compression-only or bag–mask ventilation. The most breathable nanofiber respirators carry the technical possibility for inflation of the mannequin. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of mouth-to-mouth breathing through a FFP2 respirator during BLS. Methods: In the cross-over simulation-based study, the medical students performed BLS using a breathable nanofiber respirator for 2 min on three mannequins. The quantitative and qualitative efficacy of mouth-to-mouth ventilation through the respirator in BLS training was analyzed. The primary aim was the effectivity of mouth-to-mouth ventilation through a breathable respirator. The secondary aims were mean pause, longest pause, success in achieving the optimal breath volume, technique of ventilation, and incidence of adverse events. Results: In 104 students, effective breath was reached in 951 of 981 (96.9%) attempts in Adult BLS mannequin (Prestan), 822 of 906 (90.7%) in Resusci Anne, and 1777 of 1857 (95.7%) in Resusci Baby. In Resusci Anne and Resusci Baby, 28.9%/15.9% of visible chest rises were evaluated as low-, 33.0%/44.0% as optimal-, and 28.8%/35.8% as high-volume breaths. Conclusions: Mouth-to-mouth ventilation through a breathable respirator had an effectivity greater than 90%.

show abstract

Barrier resuscitation by lay rescuers during COVID-19 pandemic

Cited by 5 publications

References 15 publications

Thin foil body-shield resuscitation barrier device to protect from blood: an experimental study

Thin foil body-shield resuscitation barrier device to protect from blood: an experimental study

The Viability of Using Remote Controlled Mechanical Chest Compression Devices to Reduce Contamination in Cardiac Arrest Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Feasibility of Mouth-to-Mouth Ventilation through FFP2 Respirator in BLS Training during COVID-19 Pandemic (MOVERESP Study): Simulation-Based Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About