Mechanical LUCAS resuscitation is effective, reduces physical workload and improves mental performance of helicopter teams.
Minerva Anestesiologica · 2015-11-17 · Randomised trial
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physical and mental workload during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is challenging under extreme working conditions. We hypothesized that the mechanical chest-compression device Lund University Cardiac Assist System (LUCAS) increases the effectiveness of CPR, decreases the physical workload and improves the mental performance of the emergency medical service (EMS) staff during simulated emergency helicopter flights. METHODS: During simulated helicopter flights, 12 EMS teams performed manual or LUCAS-CPR on a manikin at random order. Compression depth, rate, overall time of compressions, application of drugs and defibrillation were recorded to test the quality of CPR. Heart rate monitoring of EMS members was used as a surrogate of physical workload. Cognitive performance was evaluated shortly after each flight by a questionnaire and a memory test about medical and extraneous items presented to the teams during the flights. RESULTS: Overall times of chest-compressions were similar, compression rate (101.7±9.6/min) was lower and compressions were deeper (3.9±0.2cm) with LUCAS as compared to manual CPR (113.3±19.3/min and 3.7±0.4cm) (P<0.01, respectively). Heart rates of the EMS staff were increased after manual as compared to mechanical CPR (100.1±21.0 vs. 80.4±11.3, P<0.01). Results of the questionnaire (93.6±6.9% vs. 87.0±7.3% correct answers, P<0.01) and memory test (22.4±15.4% vs. 11.3±7.5%, P<0.02) were significantly better after LUCAS resuscitation. Dosing of drugs, application intervals and rate of correct handling of drugs and defibrillation were not different between LUCAS or manual CPR. CONCLUSIONS: During simulated helicopter flights LUCAS-CPR improved the efficacy of chest-compressions, was physically less demanding and provided enhanced cognitive performance of the EMS team as compared to manual CPR.
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Helicopter & air ambulance · Mechanical CPR · Paramedics & EMTs · Teamwork & human factors
Related articles
- LUCAS compared to manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation is more effective during helicopter rescue-a prospective, randomized, cross-over manikin study. (Am J Emerg Med, 2013)
- Objective performance of emergency medical technicians in the use of mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation compared with subjective self-evaluation: a cross-sectional, simulation-based study. (BMJ Open, 2022)
- Simulation-based Randomized Comparative Assessment of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Resuscitation Bundle Completion by Emergency Medical Service Teams Using Standard Life Support or an Experimental Automation-assisted Approach. (Simul Healthc, 2016)
- Optimal paramedic numbers in resuscitation of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A randomized controlled study in a simulation setting. (PLoS One, 2020)
- Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation's Role in Helicopter Air Ambulances: A Narrative Review. (Air Med J, 2022)
- Manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation versus mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Which one is more effective during ambulance transport? (Turk J Emerg Med, 2021)