Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Manual vs. integrated automatic load-distributi...

Research

Associated organisational unit

Links

Text available via DOI:

Keywords

View graph of relations

Manual vs. integrated automatic load-distributing band CPR with equal survival after out of hospital cardiac arrest: the randomized CIRC trial

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Manual vs. integrated automatic load-distributing band CPR with equal survival after out of hospital cardiac arrest: the randomized CIRC trial. / Wik, Lars; Olsen, Jan-Aage; Persse, David et al.
In: Resuscitation, Vol. 85, No. 6, 06.2014, p. 741-748.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Wik, L, Olsen, J-A, Persse, D, Sterz, F, Lozano Jr, M, Brouwer, MA, Westfall, M, Souders, C, Malzer, R, Grunsven, PMV, Travis, D, Whitehead, A, Herken, UR & Lerner, EB 2014, 'Manual vs. integrated automatic load-distributing band CPR with equal survival after out of hospital cardiac arrest: the randomized CIRC trial', Resuscitation, vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 741-748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.03.005

APA

Wik, L., Olsen, J-A., Persse, D., Sterz, F., Lozano Jr, M., Brouwer, M. A., Westfall, M., Souders, C., Malzer, R., Grunsven, P. M. V., Travis, D., Whitehead, A., Herken, U. R., & Lerner, E. B. (2014). Manual vs. integrated automatic load-distributing band CPR with equal survival after out of hospital cardiac arrest: the randomized CIRC trial. Resuscitation, 85(6), 741-748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.03.005

Vancouver

Wik L, Olsen J-A, Persse D, Sterz F, Lozano Jr M, Brouwer MA et al. Manual vs. integrated automatic load-distributing band CPR with equal survival after out of hospital cardiac arrest: the randomized CIRC trial. Resuscitation. 2014 Jun;85(6):741-748. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.03.005

Author

Wik, Lars ; Olsen, Jan-Aage ; Persse, David et al. / Manual vs. integrated automatic load-distributing band CPR with equal survival after out of hospital cardiac arrest : the randomized CIRC trial. In: Resuscitation. 2014 ; Vol. 85, No. 6. pp. 741-748.

Bibtex

@article{1df2a24679af4feca5c5162de71a23c0,
title = "Manual vs. integrated automatic load-distributing band CPR with equal survival after out of hospital cardiac arrest: the randomized CIRC trial",
abstract = "Objective: To compare integrated automated load distributing band CPR (iA-CPR) with high-quality manual CPR (M-CPR) to determine equivalence, superiority, or inferiority in survival to hospital discharge.Methods: Between March 5, 2009 and January 11, 2011 a randomized, unblinded, controlled group sequential trial of adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of presumed cardiac origin was conducted at three US and two European sites. After EMS providers initiated manual compressions patients were randomizedto receive either iA-CPR or M-CPR. Patient follow-up was until all patients were discharged alive or died. The primary outcome, survival to hospital discharge, was analyzed adjusting for covariates, (age, witnessed arrest, initial cardiac rhythm, enrollment site) and interim analyses. CPR quality and protocol adherence were monitored (CPR fraction) electronically throughout the trial.Results: Of 4753 randomized patients, 522 (11.0%) met post enrollment exclusion criteria. Therefore, 2099 (49.6%) received iA-CPR and 2132 (50.4%) M-CPR. Sustained ROSC (emergency department admittance), 24 h survival and hospital discharge (unknown for 12 cases) for iA-CPR compared to M-CPR were 600(28.6%) vs. 689 (32.3%), 456 (21.8%) vs. 532 (25.0%), 196 (9.4%) vs. 233 (11.0%) patients, respectively. The adjusted odds ratio of survival to hospital discharge for iA-CPR compared to M-CPR, was 1.06 (95% CI 0.83–1.37), meeting the criteria for equivalence. The 20 min CPR fraction was 80.4% for iA-CPR and 80.2% for M-CPR.Conclusion: Compared to high-quality M-CPR, iA-CPR resulted in statistically equivalent survival to hospital discharge.",
keywords = "Cardiac arrest, Cardiopulmonary resuscitation , Survival , Load distributing band",
author = "Lars Wik and Jan-Aage Olsen and David Persse and Fritz Sterz and {Lozano Jr}, Michael and Brouwer, {Marc A.} and Mark Westfall and Chris Souders and Reinhard Malzer and Grunsven, {Pierre M. van} and David Travis and Anne Whitehead and Herken, {Ulrich R.} and Lerner, {E. Brooke}",
year = "2014",
month = jun,
doi = "10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.03.005",
language = "English",
volume = "85",
pages = "741--748",
journal = "Resuscitation",
issn = "1873-1570",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Manual vs. integrated automatic load-distributing band CPR with equal survival after out of hospital cardiac arrest

T2 - the randomized CIRC trial

AU - Wik, Lars

AU - Olsen, Jan-Aage

AU - Persse, David

AU - Sterz, Fritz

AU - Lozano Jr, Michael

AU - Brouwer, Marc A.

AU - Westfall, Mark

AU - Souders, Chris

AU - Malzer, Reinhard

AU - Grunsven, Pierre M. van

AU - Travis, David

AU - Whitehead, Anne

AU - Herken, Ulrich R.

AU - Lerner, E. Brooke

PY - 2014/6

Y1 - 2014/6

N2 - Objective: To compare integrated automated load distributing band CPR (iA-CPR) with high-quality manual CPR (M-CPR) to determine equivalence, superiority, or inferiority in survival to hospital discharge.Methods: Between March 5, 2009 and January 11, 2011 a randomized, unblinded, controlled group sequential trial of adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of presumed cardiac origin was conducted at three US and two European sites. After EMS providers initiated manual compressions patients were randomizedto receive either iA-CPR or M-CPR. Patient follow-up was until all patients were discharged alive or died. The primary outcome, survival to hospital discharge, was analyzed adjusting for covariates, (age, witnessed arrest, initial cardiac rhythm, enrollment site) and interim analyses. CPR quality and protocol adherence were monitored (CPR fraction) electronically throughout the trial.Results: Of 4753 randomized patients, 522 (11.0%) met post enrollment exclusion criteria. Therefore, 2099 (49.6%) received iA-CPR and 2132 (50.4%) M-CPR. Sustained ROSC (emergency department admittance), 24 h survival and hospital discharge (unknown for 12 cases) for iA-CPR compared to M-CPR were 600(28.6%) vs. 689 (32.3%), 456 (21.8%) vs. 532 (25.0%), 196 (9.4%) vs. 233 (11.0%) patients, respectively. The adjusted odds ratio of survival to hospital discharge for iA-CPR compared to M-CPR, was 1.06 (95% CI 0.83–1.37), meeting the criteria for equivalence. The 20 min CPR fraction was 80.4% for iA-CPR and 80.2% for M-CPR.Conclusion: Compared to high-quality M-CPR, iA-CPR resulted in statistically equivalent survival to hospital discharge.

AB - Objective: To compare integrated automated load distributing band CPR (iA-CPR) with high-quality manual CPR (M-CPR) to determine equivalence, superiority, or inferiority in survival to hospital discharge.Methods: Between March 5, 2009 and January 11, 2011 a randomized, unblinded, controlled group sequential trial of adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of presumed cardiac origin was conducted at three US and two European sites. After EMS providers initiated manual compressions patients were randomizedto receive either iA-CPR or M-CPR. Patient follow-up was until all patients were discharged alive or died. The primary outcome, survival to hospital discharge, was analyzed adjusting for covariates, (age, witnessed arrest, initial cardiac rhythm, enrollment site) and interim analyses. CPR quality and protocol adherence were monitored (CPR fraction) electronically throughout the trial.Results: Of 4753 randomized patients, 522 (11.0%) met post enrollment exclusion criteria. Therefore, 2099 (49.6%) received iA-CPR and 2132 (50.4%) M-CPR. Sustained ROSC (emergency department admittance), 24 h survival and hospital discharge (unknown for 12 cases) for iA-CPR compared to M-CPR were 600(28.6%) vs. 689 (32.3%), 456 (21.8%) vs. 532 (25.0%), 196 (9.4%) vs. 233 (11.0%) patients, respectively. The adjusted odds ratio of survival to hospital discharge for iA-CPR compared to M-CPR, was 1.06 (95% CI 0.83–1.37), meeting the criteria for equivalence. The 20 min CPR fraction was 80.4% for iA-CPR and 80.2% for M-CPR.Conclusion: Compared to high-quality M-CPR, iA-CPR resulted in statistically equivalent survival to hospital discharge.

KW - Cardiac arrest

KW - Cardiopulmonary resuscitation

KW - Survival

KW - Load distributing band

U2 - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.03.005

DO - 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.03.005

M3 - Journal article

VL - 85

SP - 741

EP - 748

JO - Resuscitation

JF - Resuscitation

SN - 1873-1570

IS - 6

ER -