Observational studyInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Physiological Response of Quality Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, Crossover Trial on Mannequin in Extreme Temperature Conditions.
Observational study in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality of Basic Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation of Adults at Medium and High Altitudes, with and Without Conditioning: Study Protocol.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Article
- Paramedics' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding the use of personal protective equipment against COVID-19.Qatar medical journal · 2022Article
- The Relationship between Selected Body Composition Components and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Parameters in Nurses: An Observational Simulation Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- How Health Habits Influence the Physiological Response During a Physical Activity in Extreme Temperatures?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo determine the relationship between physiological fatigue and the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in trained resuscitators in hostile thermal environments (extreme cold and heat) simulating the different conditions found in an out-of-hospital cardiorespiratory arrest.
methodsProspective observational study involving 60 students of the health sciences with training in resuscitation, who simulated CPR on a mannequin for 10 min in different thermal environments: thermo-neutral environment (21 °C and 60% humidity), heat environment (41 °C and 98% humidity) and cold environment (-35 °C and 80% humidity). Physiological parameters (heart rate and lactic acid) and CPR quality were monitored.
resultsWe detected a significant increase in the number of compressions per minute in the "heat environment" group after three minutes and in the mean rate after one minute. We observed a negative correlation between the total number of compressions and mean rate with respect to mean depth. The fraction of compressions (proportion of time in which chest compressions are carried out) was significant over time and the mean rate was higher in the "heat environment". Physiological parameters revealed no differences in heart rate depending on the resuscitation scenario; however, there was a greater and faster increase in lactate in the "heat environment" (significant at minute 3). The total proportion of participants reaching metabolic fatigue was also higher in the "heat environment".
conclusionsA warm climate modifies metabolic parameters, reducing the quality of the CPR maneuver.
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.