• Resuscitation · Mar 2021

    Randomized Controlled Trial

    The use of personal protection equipment does not impair the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A prospective triple-cross over randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

    • Calvin Lukas Kienbacher, Jürgen Grafeneder, Katharina Tscherny, Mario Krammel, Verena Fuhrmann, Maximilian Niederer, Sabine Neudorfsky, Klaus Herbich, Wolfgang Schreiber, Harald Herkner, and Dominik Roth.
    • Department of Emergency Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
    • Resuscitation. 2021 Mar 1; 160: 79-83.

    AimPrior studies suggest that the use of personal protective equipment might impair the quality of critical care. We investigated the influence of personal protective equipment on out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation.MethodsRandomised controlled non-inferiority triple-crossover study. Forty-eight emergency medical service providers, randomized into teams of two, performed 12 min of basic life support (BLS) on a manikin after climbing 3 flights of stairs. Three scenarios were completed in a randomised order: Without personal protective equipment, with personal protective equipment including a filtering face piece (FFP) 2 mask with valve, and with personal protective equipment including an FFP2 mask without valve. The primary outcome was mean depth of chest compressions with a pre-defined non-inferiority margin of 3.5 mm. Secondary outcomes included other measurements of CPR quality, providers' subjective exhaustion levels, and providers' vital signs, including end-tidal CO2.ResultsDifferences regarding the primary outcome were well below the pre-defined non-inferiority margins for both control vs. personal protective equipment without valve (absolute difference 1 mm, 95% CI [-1, 2]) and control vs. personal protective equipment with valve (absolute difference 1 mm, [-0.2, 2]). This was also true for secondary outcomes regarding quality of chest compressions and providers' vital signs including etCO2. Subjective physical strain after BLS was higher in the personal protective equipment groups (Borg 4 (SD 3) without valve, 4 (SD 2) with valve) than in the control group (Borg 3 (SD 2)).ConclusionPPE including masks with and without expiration valve is safe for use without concerns regarding the impairment of CPR quality.Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.