The Efficacy of LUCAS in Prehospital Cardiac Arrest Scenarios: A Crossover Mannequin Study.
INTRODUCTION: High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is critical for successful cardiac arrest outcomes. Mechanical devices may improve CPR quality. We simulated a prehospital cardiac arrest, including patient transport, and compared the performance of the LUCAS™ device, a mechanical chest compression-decompression system, to manual CPR. We hypothesized that because of the movement involved in transporting the patient, LUCAS would provide chest compressions more consistent with high-quality CPR guidelines.
METHODS: We performed a crossover-controlled study in which a recording mannequin was placed on the second floor of a building. An emergency medical services (EMS) crew responded, defibrillated, and provided either manual or LUCAS CPR. The team transported the mannequin through hallways and down stairs to an ambulance and drove to the hospital with CPR in progress. Critical events were manually timed while the mannequin recorded data on compressions.
RESULTS: Twenty-three EMS providers participated. Median time to defibrillation was not different for LUCAS compared to manual CPR (p=0.97). LUCAS had a lower median number of compressions per minute (112/min vs. 125/min; IQR = 102-128 and 102-126 respectively; p
CONCLUSION: In our simulation, LUCAS had a higher rate of adequate compressions and decreased total hands-off time as compared to manual CPR. Chest compression quality may be better when using a mechanical device during patient movement in prehospital cardiac arrest patient.
Published In/Presented At
Gyory, R. A., Buchle, S. E., Rodgers, D., & Lubin, J. S. (2017). The Efficacy of LUCAS in Prehospital Cardiac Arrest Scenarios: A Crossover Mannequin Study. The western journal of emergency medicine, 18(3), 437–445. https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2017.1.32575
Medicine and Health Sciences
Department of Emergency Medicine