Article citationsMore>>

Yost, D., Phillips, R.H., Gonzales, L., Lick, C.J., Satterlee, P., Levy, M., Barger, J., Dodson, P., Poggi, S., Wojcik, K., et al. (2012) Assessment of CPR Interruptions from Transthoracic Impedance during Use of the LUCAS Mechanical Chest Compression System. Resuscitation, 83, 961-965.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.01.019

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: A Chest Compression Quality Evaluation Using Mechanical Chest Compressions under Different Working Situations in the Ambulance

  AUTHORS: Pär Lindblad, Annika Åström Victorén, Christer Axelsson, Bjarne Madsen Härdig

  KEYWORDS: Cardiac Arrest, Mechanical Chest Compression, External Chest Compressions, LUCAS CPR, Resuscitation

  JOURNAL NAME: International Journal of Clinical Medicine, Vol.6 No.8, August 6, 2015

  ABSTRACT: Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyze the quality of chest compressions in different working situations pertaining to ambulance crews using either standard chest compressions (S-CC) or LUCAS mechanical chest compressions (L-CC) in a manikin setting. Participants and Methods: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was performed using a compression to ventilation ratio of 30:2 with both S-CC and L-CC. Quality parameters were collected using a modified manikin enabling impedance measurements. The evaluation was performed in two manikin scenarios: Scenario 1 evaluated ten minutes of CPR on the ground and Scenario 2 assessed six minutes of CPR in different settings relevant to work in the ambulance. Quality parameters compared were: time to apply LUCAS, hands-off fraction, number of correct chest compressions and the rate of compressions. Results: In Scenario 1 the hands-off fraction was higher when S-CC was performed (S-CC group 29% vs. L-CC 16%, P = 0.003). We found a higher number of chest compressions (S-CC = 913 vs. L-CC = 831, P = 0.0049) and a higher rate of chest compressions (S-CC = 118 vs. L-CC = 99, P