ArticleResuscitation plus2024
Appropriateness of recommended chest compression depths for cardiopulmonary resuscitation based on chest computed tomography parameters among Thai population: A multicenter retrospective study.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- How Does Rescuer's Position Setting Impact Quality of Chest Compression: A Randomized Crossover Simulation Study on Unexperienced Clinicians.Emergency medicine international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: We evaluated the appropriateness of various chest compression (CC) depths among Thai population by comparing the calculated heart compression fraction (HCF) using mathematical methods based on chest computed tomography (CT) measurements. Methods: This multicenter retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted from September 2014 to December 2020. Chest parameters included external anteroposterior diameter (EAPD), internal anteroposterior diameter (IAPD), heart anteroposterior diameter (HAPD), and non-cardiac soft tissue measured at the level of maximum left ventricular diameter (LVmax). We compared the HCFs as calculated from CT parameters using different CC depths at 5 cm, 6 cm, 1/4 of EAPD, and 1/3 of EAPD, with further subgroup analysis stratified by sex and BMI. Results: A total of 2927 eligible adult patients with contrast-enhanced chest CT were included. The study group had mean age of 60.1 ± 14.7 years, mean BMI of 22 ± 4.4 kg/m Conclusion: The CC depth measure of 50-60 mm demonstrated efficacy in maintaining HCF and coronary perfusion in the general population except for geriatric and obese individuals. Adjusting CC depth to 1/4-1/3 of the EAPD yielded better outcomes. Future research should prioritize determining individualized CC depths based on EAPD proportion.
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.