Online CPR Certification Blog

When pneumatic device assisted CPR compressions with defibrillation are compared to manual CPR during compressions, the researchers found that the two seemed to have similar outcomes statistically. This was after they analyzed the findings of a 4 hour survival. The neurological outcomes as they were measured by the Cerebral Performance Category showed no differences as such at ICU- intensive care unit discharge, hospital discharge, a month after the CPR or even 6 months after the CPR was administered.

Comparing manual CPR versus mechanical CPR

According to a consensus statement by the American Heart Association, cardiac arrest has now been dubbed to be among the most lethal problems facing public health in US. Bystanders can, however, provide the patients with very effective CPR or even defibrillation until the arrival of the emergency medical personnel provided they are given proper instruction or training. The researchers presented their study data in September 2013 during a meeting of European Society of Cardiology. It was noted that the outcomes of the study were somehow disappointing. This is given the fact that marketing for Lucas mechanical device for chest compression has been done for a decade now.

How effective the manual chest compression is will depend on the rescuer’s skills and endurance and the manual compressions can provide about 30 percent of the normal cardiac output. Manual CPR was compared with mechanical chest compressions and the study included 1300 patients that had been given mechanical chest compression from LUCAS Chest Compression System and this was combined with defibrillation as the compressions continued. Also, additional 1289 patients also received manual CPR as well.

Is mechanical assisted CPR more effective than manual CPR?

The researchers followed the patients for a 4 hour survival period and for a good neurological outcome after being discharged from the ICU, hospital and after 1 and 6 months. The findings showed a relatively ‘good’ neurological outcome on CPC test for a 1 or 2 score and this translated to mild disability pr full recovery and also ‘moderate disability but still independent in the daily living activities’ respectively.

The 4 hour survival rates were 23.6 percent after being treated with the mechanical CPR and then there was 23.7 percent for those who had received manual CPR. Among the patients who had survived, the good neurological outcomes had actually been achieved by 62% vs. 54% of the ICU discharge, 92 percent vs. 86 percent of hospital discharge, 94 percent versus 88 percent at a month and finally 99 percent vs. 94 percent at 6 months.

There was speculation by the authors that the outcome never differed as a result of the manual chest compressions being of consistent quality or delayed defibrillation for those getting mechanical CPR treatment. The researchers did their best to ensure that the results were as accurate as possible.