Trial reportJournal of athletic training2018
Delivering Chest Compressions and Ventilations With and Without Men's Lacrosse Equipment.
Trial report in Journal of athletic training, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effects of continuous chest compression protocol on cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) quality and fatigue.PloS one · 2026Article
- The Effect of Lacrosse Protective Equipment on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Automated External Defibrillator Shock.Journal of athletic training · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextCurrent management recommendations for equipment-laden athletes in sudden cardiac arrest regarding whether to remove protective sports equipment before delivering cardiopulmonary resuscitation are unclear.
objectiveTo determine the effect of men's lacrosse equipment on chest compression and ventilation quality on patient simulators.
designCross-sectional study.
settingControlled laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER
participantsTwenty-six licensed athletic trainers (18 women, 8 men; age = 25 ± 7 years; experience = 2.1 ± 1.6 years). INTERVENTION(S): In a single 2-hour session, participants were block randomized to 3 equipment conditions for compressions and 6 conditions for ventilations on human patient simulators. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Data for chest compressions (mean compression depth, compression rate, percentage of correctly released compressions, and percentage of optimal compressions) and ventilations (ventilation rate, mean ventilation volume, and percentage of ventilations delivering optimal volume) were analyzed within participants across equipment conditions.
resultsKeeping the shoulder pads in place reduced mean compression depth (all P values < .001, effect size = 0.835) and lowered the percentages of both correctly released compressions ( P = .02, effect size = 0.579) and optimal-depth compressions (all P values < .003, effect size = 0.900). For both the bag-valve and pocket masks, keeping the chinstrap in place reduced mean ventilation volume (all P values < .001, effect size = 1.323) and lowered the percentage of optimal-volume ventilations (all P values < .006, effect size = 1.038). Regardless of equipment, using a bag-valve versus a pocket mask increased the ventilation rate (all P values < .003, effect size = 0.575), the percentage of optimal ventilations (all P values < .002, effect size = 0.671), and the mean volume ( P = .002, effect size = 0.598) across all equipment conditions.
conclusionsFor a men's lacrosse athlete who requires cardiopulmonary resuscitation, the shoulder pads should be lifted or removed to deliver chest compressions. The facemask and chinstrap, or the entire helmet, should be removed to deliver ventilations, preferably with a bag-valve mask.
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.