PubMed · 15757100
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Mike Smith. 2005. Easy as P.I.E.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15757100/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
High quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in the pre-hospital setting has been associated with improved survival rates during cardiopulmonary arrest (CPA). Recent documentation of hyperventilation associated deterioration in hemodynamics during CPR, suggests that guided or controlled ventilation strategies may contribute to improved hemodynamics and increased survival. This article briefly reviews the mechanical methods, advantages, and disadvantages of the available ventilation monitoring methods currently available for clinical use, with an emphasis on pre-hospital implementation. We recommend that more objective measurement of ventilation during CPR be performed, with emphasis on a strategy for measuring both attempted ventilation frequency (f) and delivered tidal volume (VT). The use of improved thoracic impedance pneumography and capnography are appealing for such monitoring because of the widespread availability, but modifications to existing software and clinical data compared to a clinical standard would be required before general acceptance is possible. Other methods listed may offer advantages over these in select circumstances.
OBJECTIVES: To determine emergency department (ED) staff preference for one- or two-handed paediatric chest compressions and to determine if there was a difference in compression rates delivered and fatigability between the techniques. METHODS: This was a randomised, cross-over observational study of paediatric CPR performed on a standard paediatric manikin by ED staff. Consenting, eligible staff [ED doctors and nurses] performed CPR in pairs with chest compressions delivered using a one- and two-handed technique. The outcomes of interest were compression rates for one- and two-handed CPR, decrease in compression rate over time for each technique and staff preference for technique. Data was analysed using descriptive statistics, Chi Square test and Mann-Whitney U-test as appropriate. RESULTS: Sixty-two ED staff participated in the study. Compression rates with both techniques were similar and higher than guidelines recommend (133.6 min(-1) for one-handed and 135.7 min(-1) for two-handed respectively). The compression rate slowed by 6.9 compressions/min over 1 min in one-handed compressions compared with 2.6 compressions/min in two-handed compressions (p = 0.0264). 65.6% of participants reported that they preferred the two-handed compression technique. CONCLUSION: This study showed that CPR compression rate is similar with one- and two-handed compression techniques, but compression rate decreased more quickly with the one-handed technique. The majority of staff preferred the two-handed compression technique for reasons of ease, control and uniformity with other CPR techniques.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.