Logo Logo
Switch Language to German

Joergens, Maximilian; Koeniger, Jürgen; Kanz, Karl-Georg; Birkholz, Torsten; Huebner, Heiko; Prueckner, Stephan; Zwissler, Bernhard and Trentzsch, Heiko (2021): Testing mechanical chest compression devices of different design for their suitability for prehospital patient transport-a simulator-based study. In: Springer Nature Emergency Medicine, Vol. 21, No. 1, 18

Full text not available from 'Open Access LMU'.


Background Mechanical chest compression (mCPR) offers advantages during transport under cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Little is known how devices of different design perform en-route. Aim of the study was to measure performance of mCPR devices of different construction-design during ground-based pre-hospital transport. Methods We tested animax mono (AM), autopulse (AP), corpuls cpr (CC) and LUCAS2 (L2). The route had 6 stages (transport on soft stretcher or gurney involving a stairwell, trips with turntable ladder, rescue basket and ambulance including loading/unloading). Stationary mCPR with the respective device served as control. A four-person team carried an intubated and bag-ventilated mannequin under mCPR to assess device-stability (displacement, pressure point correctness), compliance with 2015 ERC guideline criteria for high-quality chest compressions (frequency, proportion of recommended pressure depth and compression-ventilation ratio) and user satisfaction (by standardized questionnaire). Results All devices performed comparable to stationary use. Displacement rates ranged from 83% (AM) to 11% (L2). Two incorrect pressure points occurred over 15,962 compressions (0.013%). Guideline-compliant pressure depth was > 90% in all devices. Electrically powered devices showed constant frequencies while muscle-powered AM showed more variability (median 100/min, interquartile range 9). Although physical effort of AM use was comparable (median 4.0 vs. 4.5 on visual scale up to 10), participants preferred electrical devices. Conclusion All devices showed good to very good performance although device-stability, guideline compliance and user satisfaction varied by design. Our results underline the importance to check stability and connection to patient under transport.

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item