Observational studyDer Anaesthesist2018
Out-of-hospital airway management during manual compression or automated chest compression devices : A registry-based analysis.
Observational study in Der Anaesthesist, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Systematic analysis of airway registries in emergency medicine].Der Anaesthesist · 2018Pooled it
- Success of airway management in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest using different devices - a prospective, single-center, observational study comparing professions.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Observational
- Impact of endotracheal intubation versus laryngeal tube on gasometry and lactate at emergency department admission after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
- Impact of teaching on use of mechanical chest compression devices: a simulation-based trial.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Survival with Good Neurological Outcome despite Prolonged Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Extreme Acidosis after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Due to Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.Clinics and practice · 2023Article
- Tracheal intubation practices and adverse events in trauma victims on arrival to trauma triage: A single centre prospective observational study.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2022Article
- [Effect of different training methods on the use of the i-gel laryngeal mask by lay persons on a manikin].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2021Article
- Differences between manual CPR and corpuls cpr in regard to quality and outcome: study protocol of the comparing observational multi-center prospective registry study on resuscitation (COMPRESS).Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2021Observational
- [Supraglottic airway devices and intraosseous access in the treatment of patients after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest : Do we use the wrong tool too often?]Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2019Article
- [Hypotheses must be tested].Der Anaesthesist · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAirway management during resuscitation is pivotal for treating hypoxia and inducing reoxygenation. This German Resuscitation Registry (GRR) analysis investigated the influence of the type of airway used in patients treated with manual chest compression (mCC) and automated chest compression devices (ACCD) after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).
methodsOut of 42,977 patients (1 January 2010-30 June 2016) information on outcome, airway management and method of chest compressions were available for 27,544 patients. Hospital admission under cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), hospital admission with return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), hospital discharge and discharge with cerebral performance categories 1 and 2 (CPC 1,2) were used to compare outcome in patients treated with mCC vs. ACCD, and classified by endotracheal intubation (ETI), initial supraglottic airway device (SAD) changed into ETI, and only SAD use.
resultsOutcomes for hospital admission under ongoing CPR, hospital admission with ROSC, hospital discharge and neurologically intact survival (CPC 1,2) for mCC (84.8%) vs. ACCD (15.2%) groups were: 8.4/38.6%, 39.2/27.2%, 10.6/6.8%, 7.9/4.7% (p < 0.001), respectively. Only mCC with SAD/ETI for ever ROSC (OR 1.466, 95% CI: 1.353-1.588, p < 0.001) and mCC group with SAD/ETI for hospital admission with ROSC showed better outcomes (odds ratio [OR] 1.277, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.179-1.384, p < 0.001) in comparison to mCC treated with ETI. Compared to mCC/ETI, all other groups were associated with a decrease in neurologically intact survival.
conclusionBetter outcomes were found for mCC in comparison to ACCD and ETI showed better outcomes in comparison to SAD only. This observational registry study raised the hypothesis that SAD only should be avoided or SAD should be changed into ETI, independent of whether mCC or ACCD is used.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.