EBQ:Paramedic Trial: Difference between revisions
(exclusion criteria) |
(inclusion criteria) |
||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
===Patient Demographics=== | ===Patient Demographics=== | ||
===Inclusion Criteria=== | ===Inclusion Criteria=== | ||
*Vehicle included in trial is first on scene | |||
*Patient in cardiac arrest outside of a hospital | |||
*Resuscitation attempted | |||
*Known or believed to be ≥18 years of age | |||
===Exclusion Criteria=== | ===Exclusion Criteria=== | ||
Revision as of 22:40, 7 August 2015
Under Review Journal Club Article
Perkins GD. et al.. "Mechanical versus manual chest compression for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC): a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial". Lancet. 2015. 385(9972):947-55.
PubMed Full text PDF
PubMed Full text PDF
Clinical Question
Does prehospital LUCAS-2 mechanical CPR improve survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest?
Conclusion
The use of LUCAS-2 in non-traumatic, out-of-hospital cardiac arrests did not show improvement over manual CPR in patient survival to 30 days.
Major Points
- Survival to 30 days had no difference with 6% (LUCAS-2) vs. 7% (control)
- No difference in ROSC, survival of event, survival to 3 months, or survival to 12 months
- Decreased favorable neurologic outcome (CPC 1 or 2) in LUCAS-2 group
Study Design
Pragmatic, cluster randomized, controlled trial
Population
91 ambulance stations (selected for being urban and semi-urban) from 4 UK National Health Service (NHS) Ambulance Services (West Midlands, North East England, Wales, South Central).
Patient Demographics
Inclusion Criteria
- Vehicle included in trial is first on scene
- Patient in cardiac arrest outside of a hospital
- Resuscitation attempted
- Known or believed to be ≥18 years of age
Exclusion Criteria
- Cardiac arrest caused by trauma
- Known or apparent pregnancy