ArticleCritical care explorations2020
The Use of Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation May Be Associated With Improved Outcomes Over Manual Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation During Inhospital Cardiac Arrests.
Article in Critical care explorations, 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.
- Investigating the neuroprotective effect of heparin in improving mitochondrial function in rats with cardiac arrest cardiopulmonary resuscitation based on transcriptome sequencing.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- The association between mechanical CPR and outcomes from in-hospital cardiac arrest: An observational cohort study.Resuscitation · 2024Observational
- Rapid response system adaptations at 40 US hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic.Resuscitation plus · 2021Article
- Comparison between automated cardiopulmonary resuscitation and manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the rescue of cardiac and respiratory arrest.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We aimed to investigate the impact of mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation devices over manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation on outcomes from inhospital cardiac arrests.
designRestrospective review.
settingSingle academic medical center.
participantsData were collected on all patients who suffered cardiac arrest from December 2015 to November 2019. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary end point was return of spontaneous circulation. Secondary end points included survival to discharge and survival to discharge with favorable neurologic outcomes.
resultsAbout 104 patients were included in the study: 59 patients received mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation and 45 patients received manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation during the enrollment period. Return of spontaneous circulation rate was 83% in the mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation group versus 48.8% in the manual group (
conclusionsOur findings demonstrate a significant association of improved outcomes with mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation over manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation during inhospital cardiac arrests. Mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation may improve rates of return of spontaneous circulation, survival to discharge, and favorable neurologic outcomes.
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.