Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32711548›Full record

Observational studyScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2020

Mechanical chest compression devices in the helicopter emergency medical service in Switzerland.

Urs Pietsch, David Reiser, Volker Wenzel, Jürgen Knapp, Mario Tissi, Lorenz Theiler, Simon Rauch, Lorenz Meuli, Roland Albrecht

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Urs PietschDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen, Rorschacher Strasse 95, 9007, St. Gallen, Switzerland. urs.pietsch@kssg.ch.
David ReiserDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Volker WenzelDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Friedrichshafen Regional Hospital, Röntgenstraße 2, 88048, Friedrichshafen, Germany.
Jürgen KnappAir Zermatt, Emergency Medical Service, Zermatt, Switzerland.
Mario TissiSwiss Air-Ambulance, Rega (Rettungsflugwacht / Guarde Aérienne), Swiss Air-Rescue, Zurich, Switzerland.
Lorenz TheilerDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Simon RauchInstitute of Mountain Emergency Medicine, Eurac Research, Bozen, Italy.
Lorenz MeuliDepartment of Vascular Surgery, St. Gallen Cantonal Hospital, St. Gallen, Switzerland.
Roland AlbrechtDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen, Rorschacher Strasse 95, 9007, St. Gallen, Switzerland.
Kantonsspital St. Gallen · CHUniversity of Bern · CHEurac Research · ITZF Friedrichshafen (Germany) · DEZürich Airport (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the past years, several emergency medical service providers have introduced mechanical chest compression devices (MCDs) in their protocols for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Especially in helicopter emergency medical systems (HEMS), which have limitations regarding loading weight and space and typically operate in rural and remote areas, whether MCDs have benefits for patients is still unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of MCDs in a large Swiss HEMS system. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a retrospective observational study of all HEMS missions of Swiss Air rescue Rega between January 2014 and June 2016 with the use of an MCD (Autopulse®). Details of MCD use and patient outcome are reported from the medical operation journals and the hospitals' discharge letters.

resultsMCDs were used in 626 HEMS missions, and 590 patients (94%) could be included. 478 (81%) were primary missions and 112 (19%) were interhospital transfers. Forty-nine of the patients in primary missions were loaded under ongoing CPR with MCDs. Of the patients loaded after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), 20 (7%) experienced a second CA during the flight. In interhospital transfers, 102 (91%) only needed standby use of the MCD. Five (5%) patients were loaded into the helicopter with ongoing CPR. Five (5%) patients went into CA during flight and the MCD had to be activated. A shockable cardiac arrhythmia was the only factor significantly associated with better survival in resuscitation missions using MCD (OR 0.176, 95% confidence interval 0.084 to 0.372, p < 0.001).

conclusionWe conclude that equipping HEMS with MCDs may be beneficial, with non-trauma patients potentially benefitting more than trauma patients.

Indexed as

Air AmbulancesEquipment and SuppliesCardiopulmonary ResuscitationEmergency Medical ServicesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOut-of-Hospital Cardiac ArrestRetrospective StudiesSwitzerlandAutoPulseCardiopulmonary arrestCardiopulmonary resuscitationHelicopter emergency medical servicesLoad-distributing band CPR deviceMechanical chest compression devices

Identifiers

PMID32711548
PMCPMC7381862
OpenAlexW3044814659

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.