ArticleOpen access emergency medicine : OAEM2022
Comparison of Sustained Return of Spontaneous Circulation Rate Between Manual and Mechanical Chest Compression in Adult Cardiac Arrest.
Article in Open access emergency medicine : OAEM, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of mechanical against manual method in cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out‑of‑hospital cardiac arrest: A meta‑analysis.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Use of Mechanical Chest Compression for Resuscitation in Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest-Device Matters: A Propensity-Score-Based Match Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to compare the rates of sustained return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) between manual and mechanical chest compression in adult non-traumatic cardiac arrest. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from 2017 to 2019. The medical records were reviewed in 227 cardiac arrest patients aged ≥18 years who experienced out-of-hospital cardiac arrest or cardiac arrest while visiting the emergency department (ED). The patients were divided into manual chest compression and mechanical chest compression groups. The two groups were compared in terms of baseline characteristics, time to arrive at the ED, time to basic life support, initial rhythm, time to defibrillation in the shockable group, time to the first dose of adrenaline, and possible cause of arrest. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine the factors associated with ROSC. Results: A total of 227 patients met the inclusion criteria:193 patients in the manual chest compression group and 34 patients in the mechanical chest compression group. The rate of sustained ROSC in the manual chest compression group was higher (43% vs 8.8%; Conclusion: Mechanical chest compression was not associated with sustained ROSC and tended to be selectively used in patients with a prolonged duration of cardiac arrest.
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.