Active compression-decompression resuscitation: a prospective, randomized study in a two-tiered EMS system with physicians in the field.

Abstract

Improved cardiopulmonary circulation with active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ACD-CPR) has been demonstrated in studies using different animal models and a small number of humans in cardiac arrest (CA). However, prehospital studies have shown both positive and no extra benefit of ACD-CPR on return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), hospital admission and discharge rates. The aim of our prospective study was to compare standard manual CPR (S-CPR) with ACD-CPR as the initial technique of resuscitating patients with out-of-hospital CA, with respect to survival rates and neurological outcome. Patients with out-of-hospital CA treated by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel were randomly assigned to one of two groups (ACD-CPR versus S-CPR). Time intervals to key measures were documented by means of on-line tape-recording. Neurological outcome was assessed using standard scoring systems (cerebral and overall performance categories (CPC and OPC)). A total of 220 patients (S-CPR, n = 114: ACD-CPR, n = 106) were included in the study in a random order. The treatment groups were similar with respect to age, sex, time interval from collapse to CPR, defibrillation and first adrenaline medication. There was no difference between the ACD group and the standard CPR group in terms of ROSC (50.9% vs. 59.6%), hospital admission (33% vs. 33.3%), hospital discharge (16% vs. 14%), or CPC and OPC (1.82 vs. 2.13 and 2.06 vs. 2.25, respectively). Concerning complications of CPR, there was no difference between the groups. In our two-tiered EMS system with physician-staffed ambulances, ACD-CPR neither improved nor impaired survival rates and neurological prognosis in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The new CPR technique did not increase the complications associated with the resuscitation effort.