Trial reportCardiology journal2020
Resuscitation of the patient with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 when wearing personal protective equipment: A randomized multicenter crossover simulation trial.
Trial report in Cardiology journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Personal protective equipment for reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection among health care workers involved in emergency trauma surgery during the pandemic: An umbrella review.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Interleukin-6 blocking agents for treating COVID-19: a living systematic review.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Impact of personal protective equipment on the effectiveness of chest compression - A systematic review and meta-analysis.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Influence of Personal Protective Equipment on the Quality of Chest Compressions: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis appraising efficacy and safety of adrenaline for adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation.Cardiology journal · 2021Pooled it
- Impact of COVID-19 on in-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes: An updated meta-analysis.Cardiology journalPooled it
- Impact of COVID-19-adapted guidelines using different airway management strategies on resuscitation quality in out-of-hospital-cardiac-arrest - a randomised manikin study.BMC emergency medicine · 2023Trial
- Impact of VieScope® on first-attempt success during simulated COVID-19 patients intubation: A randomized cross-over simulation trial.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2023Trial
- How effective are chest compressions when wearing mask? A randomised simulation study among first-year health care students during the COVID-19 pandemic.BMC emergency medicine · 2022Trial
- Comparison of Vie Scope® and Macintosh laryngoscopes for intubation during resuscitation by paramedics wearing personal protective equipment.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2022Trial
- Comparison of intravascular access methods applied by nurses wearing personal protective equipment in simulated COVID-19 resuscitation: A randomized crossover simulation trial.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2021Trial
- Analysis of Physiological Response during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation with Personal Protective Equipment: A Randomized Crossover Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- Under Armour - Use of personal protective equipment for simulated CPR of COVID-19 patients: an observational study.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2024Observational
- The outcomes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and their predictors during the coronavirus 2019 pandemic in Iran.BMC emergency medicine · 2023Article
- ETView SL versus Macintosh Direct Laryngoscope for Endotracheal Intubation Amid Simulated COVID-19 Cardiac Arrest: A Randomized Crossover Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Effects of personal protective equipment on cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality and outcomes: A systematic review.Resuscitation plus · 2023Article
- Changes in neurological outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan: a population-based nationwide observational study.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2023Article
- Cardiac arrest and cardiopulmonary resuscitation in "hostile" environments: Using automated compression devices to minimize the rescuers' danger.World journal of cardiology · 2023Review
- COVID-19 CPR-Impact of Personal Protective Equipment during a Simulated Cardiac Arrest in Times of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Prospective Comparative Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Occurrence and Temporal Variability of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest during COVID-19 Pandemic in Comparison to the Pre-Pandemic Period in Poland-Observational Analysis of OSCAR-POL Registry.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the study was to evaluate various methods of chest compressions in patients with suspected/confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection conducted by medical students wearing full personal protective equipment (PPE) for aerosol generating procedures (AGP).
methodsThis was prospective, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, crossover simulation trial. Thirty-five medical students after an advanced cardiovascular life support course, which included performing 2-min continuous chest compression scenarios using three methods: (A) manual chest compression (CC), (B) compression with CPRMeter, (C) compression with LifeLine ARM device. During resuscitation they are wearing full personal protective equipment for aerosol generating procedures.
resultsThe median chest compression depth using manual CC, CPRMeter and LifeLine ARM varied and amounted to 40 (38-45) vs. 45 (40-50) vs. 51 (50-52) mm, respectively (p = 0.002). The median chest compression rate was 109 (IQR; 102-131) compressions per minute (CPM) for manual CC, 107 (105-127) CPM for CPRMeter, and 102 (101-102) CPM for LifeLine ARM (p = 0.027). The percentage of correct chest recoil was the highest for LifeLine ARM - 100% (95-100), 80% (60-90) in CPRMeter group, and the lowest for manual CC - 29% (26-48).
conclusionsAccording to the results of this simulation trial, automated chest compression devices (ACCD) should be used for chest compression of patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19. In the absence of ACCD, it seems reasonable to change the cardiopulmonary resuscitation algorithm (in the context of patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19) by reducing the duration of the cardiopulmonary resuscitation cycle from the current 2-min to 1-min cycles due to a statistically significant reduction in the quality of chest compressions among rescuers wearing PPE AGP.
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.