Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Implementation of mechanical chest compression in out-of-hospital carfdiac arrest in an emergency medical service system
University of Borås, School of Health Science.
Show others and affiliations
2013 (English)In: American Journal of Emergency Medicine, ISSN 0735-6757, E-ISSN 1532-8171, Vol. 31, no 8, p. 1196-1200Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Sustainable development
The content falls within the scope of Sustainable Development
Abstract [en]

AIM: The aim of this study is to describe the outcome changes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in Gothenburg, Sweden, after introduction of mechanical chest compression (MCC). METHODS: Following introduction of MCC, 1183 OHCA patients were treated from November 1, 2007, to December 31, 2011 (period 2). They were compared with 1218 OHCA patients before MCC was introduced from January 1, 1998, to May 30, 2003 (period 1). Patients in period 2 were evaluated for survival in relation to MCC use. RESULTS: The percentage of patients admitted to hospital alive increased from 25.4% to 31.9% (P < .0001). Survival to 1 month increased from 7.1% to 10.7% (P = .002) from period 1 to period 2. The proportion of ventricular fibrillation/ventricular tachycardia decreased in period 2 (P = .002). However, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (P < .0001), crew-witnessed cases (P = .04), percutaneous coronary intervention (P < .0001), therapeutic hypothermia (P < .0001), and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator use (P = .01) increased, as did time from call to emergency medicine service arrival (P < .0001) and to defibrillation (P = .006). In period 2, 60% of OHCA patients were treated with MCC. The percentages admitted alive to hospital (MCC vs no MCC) were 28.6% and 36.1% (P = .008). Corresponding figures for survival to 1 month were 5.6% and 17.6% (P < .0001). In the MCC group, we found increase in the delay from collapse to defibrillation (P < .0001), greater use of adrenaline (P < .0001), and fewer crew-witnessed cases (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Survival to 1 month after implementation of MCC was higher than before introduction. However, patients receiving MCC had low survival. Although case selection might play a role, results do not support a widespread use of MCC after OHCA.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
W.B. Saunders Co. , 2013. Vol. 31, no 8, p. 1196-1200
Keywords [sv]
Vårdutveckling
National Category
Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems
Research subject
Integrated Caring Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-1669DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2013.05.002ISI: 000323163400008PubMedID: 23752058Local ID: 2320/13030OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hb-1669DiVA, id: diva2:869738
Available from: 2015-11-13 Created: 2015-11-13 Last updated: 2017-09-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Axelsson, CHerlitz, J

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Axelsson, CHerlitz, J
By organisation
School of Health Science
In the same journal
American Journal of Emergency Medicine
Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 270 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf