• Yong-Chul Cho, Seung Ryu, Young-Seok Bak, and Won-Joon Jeong.
• Department of Emergency Medicine, Chungnam National University Hospital, Daejeon, South Korea.
• Am J Emerg Med. 2014 Aug 1;32(8):913-6.

BackgroundTo perform high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), high-quality chest compression and ventilation support should be performed. However, many providers still have not maintained an adequate ventilation rate but hyperventilated during CPR. Thus, this study was conducted to verify that the compression-adjusted ventilation (CAV) would be a more accurate ventilation method compared with the conventional ventilation (CV).MethodsVolunteer medical students and emergency medical services personnel were recruited. They were randomly divided into either the CV group or the CAV group. In the CV group, participants performed ventilation with estimation of the rate of 8 to 10 per minute (1 ventilation/6-8 seconds). In the CAV group, the ventilation rate was adjusted in line with the compression rate (compression:ventilation, 12:1). In each group, 2-rescuer adult CPR was performed on a manikin, which was intubated with an endotracheal tube, during a period of 8 minutes. The compression rate and the ventilation rate were recorded during CPR.ResultsData on 56 medical students and 41 emergency medical services personnel were analyzed. No significant difference was observed in compression rate (P =.817); however, median (interquartile range) ventilation rate differed significantly between the CV and CAV groups (8.79 [2.19] per minute vs 9.25 [1.07] per minute, P = .016). In addition, compared with the CV group, adequacy of ventilation rate was better in the CAV group (47.9% vs 85.7%, P < .001).ConclusionIn comparison with the CV, the CAV is a more accurate method for maintenance of an adequate ventilation rate.Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

22 keywords...

hide…