This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Research
Wei-Tien Chang
National Taiwan University Hospital
Corresponding Author
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: This study aims to evaluate the effect of ultrasonography (US) on quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), and US-related pause duration of pulse-checks.
Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted at the emergency department of National Taiwan University Hospital between April 2017 and May 2018. Video recordings for adult patients with non-traumatic cardiac arrest in designated resuscitation rooms were collected. The primary outcome was chest compression fraction (CCF) in the CPR with US group. The secondary outcome was pause duration of pulse checks with introduction of US or not. US-related pulse-checks were stratified into US during hands-off periods only (hands-off US), and US performing from hands-off to hands-on periods (continuous US).
Results: A total of 153 patients were enrolled. Continuous US was performed in 116 patients. CCF was similar (92%) between the CPR with and without US groups. In the CPR with US group, pause duration was significantly longer in US-related pulse-checks than that without US (9.3±8.0 v.s. 7.3±4.7s, p<0.0001). Notably, longer pause was noted in the hands-off US, as comparing with that in the continuous US (18.3±16.4 v.s. 7.7±3.5s, p<0.0001).
Conclusions: The introduction of US during CPR did not impact on CCF. Individual pause would not be lengthened if continuous US was performed while allowing chest compressions to be resumed. In addition, structured training, adequate facilities and manpower, and a timer reminding resumption of chest compressions would help sophisticated integration of US into CPR process.
Keywords
ultrasonography (US), cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), pulse check, continuous ultrasonography (continuous US), pause
Figure 2
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
Version 1
Posted 23 Dec, 2019
No community comments so far
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Critical Care & Emergency Medicine
Learn more about our company.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Research
Wei-Tien Chang
National Taiwan University Hospital
Corresponding Author
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
Version 1
Posted 23 Dec, 2019
No community comments so far
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Critical Care & Emergency Medicine
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: This study aims to evaluate the effect of ultrasonography (US) on quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), and US-related pause duration of pulse-checks.
Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted at the emergency department of National Taiwan University Hospital between April 2017 and May 2018. Video recordings for adult patients with non-traumatic cardiac arrest in designated resuscitation rooms were collected. The primary outcome was chest compression fraction (CCF) in the CPR with US group. The secondary outcome was pause duration of pulse checks with introduction of US or not. US-related pulse-checks were stratified into US during hands-off periods only (hands-off US), and US performing from hands-off to hands-on periods (continuous US).
Results: A total of 153 patients were enrolled. Continuous US was performed in 116 patients. CCF was similar (92%) between the CPR with and without US groups. In the CPR with US group, pause duration was significantly longer in US-related pulse-checks than that without US (9.3±8.0 v.s. 7.3±4.7s, p<0.0001). Notably, longer pause was noted in the hands-off US, as comparing with that in the continuous US (18.3±16.4 v.s. 7.7±3.5s, p<0.0001).
Conclusions: The introduction of US during CPR did not impact on CCF. Individual pause would not be lengthened if continuous US was performed while allowing chest compressions to be resumed. In addition, structured training, adequate facilities and manpower, and a timer reminding resumption of chest compressions would help sophisticated integration of US into CPR process.
Figure 2
Loading...