MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 17760: Maintaining High Quality CPR With an Integrated Manual/Mechanical Resuscitation Protocol

2015· article· en· W2899840343 on OpenAlexaff
Taro Irisawa, Tyler F. Vadeboncoeur, Cameron Hypes, Annemarie Silver, Robyn McDannold, Margaret Mullins, Daniel W. Spaite, Bentley J. Bobrow

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsBentley (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineResuscitationProtocol (science)Emergency medicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: High quality manual chest compressions (CC) can be achieved on scene during resuscitation of cardiac arrest patients, but manual CC quality can deteriorate during patient extrication and transport. The purpose of this study was to describe the effect on CC quality of an integrated manual/mechanical chest compression protocol developed to maintain CC quality and patient/provider safety throughout resuscitation. Methods: CC quality was monitored using a monitor with accelerometer-based CC sensing (E Series/X Series, ZOLL Medical) during the treatment of consecutive out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients between 3/1/2013-4/30/2015. The EMS agency performed manual CC guided by real-time audiovisual feedback on scene but deployed the AutoPulse load-distributing band CC device (LDB, ZOLL Medical) in a choreographed manner for extrication and transport. The LDB was also placed prophylactically on patients after ROSC. Descriptive statistics are reported as median (IQR). Results: A total of 71 OHCA patients were treated (median age 58 yrs, 66 % male) of which 39 received only manual CC and 32 received both manual and LDB CCs (22 with LDB deployed during ongoing manual CC and 10 with LDB placed after ROSC). With real-time CC feedback, high quality CCs were performed [depth 2.38 in (2.17-2.64), rate 100.3 cpm (99.2-102.5), CC fraction 87.0% (83.8-89.5)]. For patients requiring transport, the LDB was started after 14.2 min (11.6-19.2) of manual CC and was placed with minimal interruptions- total of 27.5 sec (23-42) pause time in 2 minutes prior to LDB deployment. During transport, CC fraction remained high (91.7%; 89.3-95.4) with use of LDB. Seven of 10 patients prophylactically placed on the LDB rearrested, 3 rearrested during transport. Conclusion: A choreographed and rehearsed integrated chest compression protocol featuring both manual and mechanical compressions, allows for high quality resuscitation with minimal compression interruptions. Placement of a mechanical device on patients after ROSC may be beneficial as over two-thirds of patients in this study rearrested, one-third of which occurred during transport when delivery of manual compressions is difficult and potentially dangerous.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→