CPR using the lifeline ARM mechanical chest compression device: a randomized, crossover, manikin trial.

INTRODUCTION: European Resuscitation Council as well as American Heart Association guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) stress the importance of uninterrupted and effective chest compressions (CCs). Manual CPR decreases in quality of CCs over time because of fatigue which impacts outcome. We report the first study with the Lifeline ARM automated CC device for providing uninterrupted CCs. METHODS: Seventy-eight paramedics participated in this randomized, crossover, manikin trial. We compared the fraction of effective CCs between manual CPR and automated CPR using the ARM. RESULTS: Using the ARM during resuscitation resulted in a higher percentage of effective CCs (100/min [interquartile range, 99-100]) compared with manual CCs (43/min [interquartile range, 39-46]; P<.001). The number of effective CCs decreased less over time with the ARM (P<.001), more often reached the required depth of 5 cm (97% vs 63%, P<.001), and more often reached the recommended CC rate (P<.001). The median tidal volume was higher and hands-off time was lower when using the ARM. CONCLUSION: Mechanical CCs in our study adhere more closely to current guidelines than manual CCs. The Lifeline ARM provides more effective CCs, more ventilation time and minute volume, less hands-off time, and less decrease in effective CCs over time compared with manual Basic Life Support and might therefore impact outcome.

Airtraq Laryngoscope Versus the Conventional Macintosh Laryngoscope During Pediatric Intubation Performed by Nurses: A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study With Three Airway Scenarios.

OBJECTIVES: We hypothesized that the Airtraq laryngoscope (Airtraq LLC, Bonita Springs, Fla) is beneficial for intubation of pediatric manikins while performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). In the present study, we evaluated the effectiveness of the Macintosh (MAC) laryngoscope (HEINE Optotechnik, Munich, Germany) and Airtraq in 3 simulated CPR scenarios. METHODS: A randomized crossover simulation trial was designed. Eighty-three nurses intubated the trachea of a PediaSIM CPR training manikin (FCAE HealthCare, Sarasota, Fla) using the MAC and Airtraq in a normal airway scenario, normal airway with chest compression scenario, and difficult airway with chest compression scenario. The participants were directed to perform a maximum of 3 attempts in each scenario. The success rate, time to intubation, Cormack & Lehane grade, dental compression, and the ease of intubation were measured. RESULTS: All participants performed successful intubation with the Airtraq in all 3 scenarios. In all scenarios, the success rate was significantly higher and the time to intubation was significantly shorter with the Airtraq than with the MAC. Glottic visualization using the Cormack-Lehane scale was also better when using Airtraq in all scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: In this manikin study, we found that the Airtraq can be used successfully for the intubation of pediatric manikins with normal and difficult airways by medical staff without previous experience in pediatric intubation. Moreover, intubation can be achieved without interrupting chest compression. The use of the Airtraq compared with the MAC led to faster time to intubation. Nevertheless, we recommend that the performance of the Airtraq and the MAC during CPR should be further evaluated in a clinical setting.

A comparison of the McGrath-MAC and Macintosh laryngoscopes for child tracheal intubation during resuscitation by paramedics. A randomized, crossover, manikin study.

INTRODUCTION: Prehospital tracheal intubation by paramedics during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in children is challenging. The potential role of new intubation devices during CPR is unclear. Our objective was to assess the impact of CPR (with and without chest compressions [CCs]) on the success and time to intubation (TTI) with the Macintosh laryngoscope vs the McGrath video laryngoscope on a pediatric manikin. METHODS: This was an open, prospective, randomized, crossover, manikin trial involving 95 paramedics who performed intubations in a PediaSIM pediatric high-fidelity manikin with Macintosh and McGrath laryngoscopes, with and without concomitant mechanical CCs. Primary outcome was the TTI, and secondary outcome was success of the attempt. Participants rated their best glottic view, the severity of the potential dental trauma, and subjective opinion about the difficulty of the procedure. RESULTS: The median TTI with the Macintosh in the scenario with uninterrupted CC was 33 (interquartile range [IQR], 24-36) seconds, which is significantly longer than TTI in the scenario with interrupted CC (23 [IQR, 20-29] seconds, P < .001). Time to intubation using the McGrath was similar in both scenarios: 20 (IQR, 17-23) seconds vs 19.5 (IQR, 17-22) seconds (P = .083). A statistically significant difference between McGrath and Macintosh was noticed in TTI both in scenario with (P < .001) and without CC (P = .017). CONCLUSIONS: McGrath video laryngoscope helps paramedics to intubate a pediatric manikin in a CPR scenario in less time and with fewer attempts than with the classical Macintosh, both in case of ongoing or stopped CC. McGrath use in actual patients could improve CPR quality by paramedics.

Ability of paramedics to perform endotracheal intubation during continuous chest compressions: a randomized cadaver study comparing Pentax AWS and Macintosh laryngoscopes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the trial was to compare the time parameters for intubation with the use of the Macintosh (MAC) laryngoscope and Pentax AWS-S100 videolaryngoscope (AWS; Pentax Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) with and without chest compression (CC) by paramedics during simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a cadaver model. METHODS: This was a randomized crossover cadaver trial. Thirty-five paramedics with no experience in videolaryngoscopy participated in the study. They performed intubation in two emergency scenarios: scenario A, normal airway without CC; scenario B, normal airway with continuous CC. RESULTS: The median time to first ventilation with the use of the AWS and the MAC was similar in scenario A: 25 (IQR, 22-27) seconds vs. 24 (IQR, 22.5-26) seconds (P=.072). A statistically significant difference in TTFV between AWS and MAC was noticed in scenario B (P=.011). In scenario A, the first endotracheal intubation (ETI) attempt success rate was achieved in 97.1% with AWS compared with 94.3% with MAC (P=.43). In scenario B, the success rate after the first ETI attempt with the use of the different intubation methods varied and amounted to 88.6% vs. 77.1% for AWS and MAC, respectively (P=.002). CONCLUSIONS: The Pentax AWS offered a superior glottic view as compared with the MAC laryngoscope, which was associated with a higher intubation rate and a shorter intubation time during an uninterrupted CC scenario. However, in the scenario without CC, the results for AWS and MAC were comparable.

Randomized trial of the chest compressions effectiveness comparing 3 feedback CPR devices and standard basic life support by nurses.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a leading cause of mortality and serious neurological morbidity in Europe. We aim to investigate the effect of 3 cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) feedback devices on effectiveness of chest compression during CPR. METHODS: This was prospective, randomized, crossover, controlled trial. Following a brief didactic session, 140 volunteer nurses inexperienced with feedback CPR devices attempted chest compression on a manikin using 3 CPR feedback devices (TrueCPR, CPR-Ezy, and iCPR) and standard basic life support (BLS) without feedback. RESULTS: Comparison of standard BLS, TrueCPR, CPR-Ezy, and iCPR showed differences in the effectiveness of chest compression (compressions with correct pressure point, correct depth, and sufficient decompression), which are, respectively, 37.5%, 85.6%, 39.5%, and 33.4%; compression depth (44.6 vs 54.5 vs 45.6 vs 39.6 mm); and compression rate (129.4 vs 110.2 vs 101.5 vs 103.5 min(-1)). CONCLUSIONS: During the simulated resuscitation scenario, only TrueCPR significantly affected the increased effectiveness compression compared with standard BLS, CPR-Ezy, and iCPR. Further studies are required to confirm the results in clinical practice.

Comparison of the TruView PCD video laryngoscope and macintosh laryngoscope for pediatric tracheal intubation by novice paramedics: a randomized crossover simulation trial.

UNLABELLED: The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether the TruView video laryngoscope (TruView) facilitates pediatric endotracheal intubation (ETI) more quickly and safely than conventional Macintosh laryngoscope (MAC) in three manikin-based airway scenarios. This was a randomized crossover manikin study including 120 novice paramedics. The participants performed tracheal intubations using both TruView and MAC on a pediatric manikin in a control scenario (A), chest compression scenario (B), and chest compression cervical stabilization scenario (C). The sequence of scenarios was randomized. The primary outcome was time to intubation. Secondary outcomes were overall success rates, incidence of dental trauma, and ease of intubation. All intubation attempts were assessed by a trained assistant. The overall success rate was significantly higher with the TruView compared than the MAC in scenario B (100 vs. 81.7 %; p = 0.011) and scenario C (100 vs. 68.3 %; p < 0.001). The intubation time was significantly lower with the TruView than the MAC (18.5 vs. 24.3 s, p = 0.017, for scenario A; 21.6 vs. 25.7 s, p = 0.023, for scenario B; and 28.9 vs. 45.4 s, p < 0.001, for scenario C). Glottic view quality was better with TruView than the MAC in all scenarios, p < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: The TruView offers better intubation conditions than the MAC on a pediatric manikin in the control scenario, chest compression scenario, and chest compression scenario with cervical stabilization scenario. The TruView may be used to elevate the epiglottis for orotracheal intubation. Further clinical studies are necessary to confirm these initial positive findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02289872. WHAT IS KNOWN: •Prehospital pediatric intubation using a standard laryngoscope is varied and ranges from 63.4 to 82 %. What is New: •This is the first study showing efficiency of pediatric endotracheal intubation using the TruView PCD by paramedics in tree simulation scenarios. •TruView PCD offers better pediatric intubation conditions than the Macintosh laryngoscope.

Comparison of Coopdech®, CoPilot®, Intubrite®, and Macintosh laryngoscopes for tracheal intubation during pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a randomized, controlled crossover simulation trial.

UNLABELLED: The aim of the study was to compare the intubation times and success rates of various laryngoscopes during resuscitation in pediatric emergency intubation with uninterrupted chest compression on a standardized pediatric manikin model. This was a randomized crossover study with 107 paramedic participants. We compared times to successful intubation, intubation success rates, and glottic visibility using a Cormack-Lehane grade for Macintosh, Intubrite®, Coopdech®, and Copilot® laryngoscopes. One hundred seven paramedics (mean age 31.2 ± 7.5 years) routinely involved in the management of prehospital care participated in this study. Intubation success rates (overall effectiveness), which was the primary study endpoint, were highest for the Coopdech® and CoPilot® devices (100 %) and were lowest for Intubrite® (89.7 %, p < 0.001) and Macintosh (80.4 %, p < 0.001). The secondary study endpoint, time to first effective ventilation, was achieved fastest when using the Coopdech® laryngoscope (21.6 ± 6.2 s) and was significantly slower with all other devices (Intubrite® 25.4 ± 10.5 s, p = 0.006; CoPilot® 25.6 ± 7.4 s, p = 0.007; Macintosh 29.4 ± 8.2 s, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We conclude that in child simulations managed by paramedics, the Coopdech® and Copilot® video laryngoscopes performed better than the standard Macintosh or Intubrite® laryngoscopes for endotracheal intubation during child chest compression.

Pentax Airway Scope AWS-S200 video laryngoscope for child tracheal intubation in a manikin study with 3 airway scenarios.

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal intubation is considered a criterion standard for securing the airway during cardiopulmonary resuscitation, yet it requires a very skillful operator. The aim of the study was to investigate whether paramedic staff can successfully use the Pentax Airway Scope AWS-S200 video laryngoscope (AWS) for intubating with 3 simulated airway scenarios. METHODS: It was a randomized nonblinded crossover simulation trial. Fifty-four paramedics performed intubation using an AWS in a manikin, with 3 airway scenarios: scenario A, normal airway; scenario B, normal airway with chest compression (CC); and scenario C, difficult airway with CC. RESULTS: Median intubation times for the AWS during scenarios A, B, and C were 20 seconds (interquartile range [IQR], 19-23 seconds), 22 seconds (IQR, 20-25 seconds), and 26 seconds (IQR, 23-29 seconds), respectively, and the respective overall success rates of intubation were 100%, 100%, and 94.4%. CONCLUSION: In this manikin study, paramedics could successfully intubate using the AWS, regardless of CCs being interrupted or not, even when a patient's airway was difficult.

Comparison of 4 supraglotttic devices used by paramedics during simulated CPR : a randomized controlled crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Ensuring an open airway during cardiopulmonary resuscitation is fundamental. The aim of this study was to determine the success rate of blind intubation during simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation by untrained personnel. METHODS: Four devices were compared in a simulated resuscitation scenario: ILMA (Intavent Direct Ltd, Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom), Cobra PLA (Engineered Medical Systems Inc, Indianapolis, IN), Supraglottic Airway Laryngopharyngeal Tube (SALT) (ECOLAB, St. Paul, MN), and Air-Q (Mercury Medical, Clearwater, FL). A group of 210 paramedics intubated a manikin with continuous chest compressions. RESULTS: The mean times to intubation were 40.46 ± 4.64, 33.96 ± 6.23, 17.2 ± 4.63, and 49.23 ± 13.19 seconds (SALT vs ILMA, Cobra PLA, and Air-Q; P < .05). The success ratios of blind intubation for the devices were 86.7%, 85.7%, 100%, and 71.4% (SALT vs ILMA, Cobra PLA, and Air-Q; P < .05). CONCLUSION: The study showed that the most efficient device with the shortest blind intubation time was the SALT device.

Comparison of infant intubation through the TruView EVO2, TruView PCD, and Miller laryngoscope by paramedics during simulated infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A randomized crossover manikin study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of the TruView EVO2, TruView PCD, and Miller laryngoscopes for tracheal intubation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation with and without chest compressions (CCs) by paramedics in an infant manikin model. METHODS: This was an open, prospective, randomized, simulated trial. After a brief didactic session, 78 volunteer paramedics attempted to intubate a manikin using TruView EVO2, TruView PCD, and Miller laryngoscopes during resuscitation with and without CC scenarios. Primary end point was intubation success rate and secondary was time to intubation with each device. Glottic view using a Cormack-Lehane grade in using each device was also assessed. RESULTS: In scenario with uninterrupted CCs, the median time to intubation using the TruView EVO2, TruView PCD, and Miller varied with the times being 25.3 seconds (interquartile range [IQR], 23-30.5 seconds) vs 20.2 seconds (IQR, 18-23 seconds) vs 24.4 seconds (IQR, 21-28 seconds), respectively. The overall success rate of intubation during CC for the devices were 94.9% vs 100% vs 92.1%. During intubation without CC, median time to intubation varied and amounted to 24.9 seconds (IQR, 21-29.6 seconds) for TruView EVO2, 18.3 seconds (IQR, 16-21.3 seconds) for TruView PCD, and 19.4 seconds (IQR, 17-23.3 seconds) for Miller laryngoscope. The overall success rate of intubation without CC for all devices was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: For infant tracheal intubation with TruView PCD, when used by paramedics, the malleable TruView PCD showed shorter intubation time and higher overall success rate in a simulated CC scenario than TruView EVO2 or Miller laryngoscopes. Further clinical studies are necessary to confirm these initial positive findings.

Child endotracheal intubation with a Clarus Levitan fiberoptic stylet vs Macintosh laryngoscope during resuscitation performed by paramedics: a randomized crossover manikin trial.

INTRODUCTION: The main cause of cardiac arrest in pediatric patients is respiratory failure. OBJECTIVE: To test the ability of paramedics to intubate the trachea of a child by means of the standard Macintosh [MAC] laryngoscope vs the Clarus Leviatan fiberoptic stylet (FPS) during 3-airway scenarios. METHODS: This was a randomized crossover manikin study involving 89 paramedics. The participants performed tracheal intubations using the MAC laryngoscope and the Clarus Leviatan FPS in 3 pediatric airway scenarios: scenario A, normal airway without chest compression (CC); scenario B, normal airway with CC; and scenario C, difficult airway with CC. RESULTS: A total of 89 paramedics participated in this study. In scenario A, the FPS maintained a better success rate at first attempt (97.8% vs 88.9%; P=.73) and time required to intubate (17 [interquartile range, 15-21) seconds vs 18 [interquartile range, 16-22] seconds; P=.67) when compared with MAC. In scenarios B and C, the results with FPS were significantly better than those with MAC (P<.05) for all analyzed variables. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested that the FPS could be used as an option for airway management even for paramedics with little experience. Future studies should explore the efficacy of FPS in pediatric clinical emergency settings.

Simulated endotracheal intubation of a patient with cervical spine immobilization during resuscitation: a randomized comparison of the Pentax AWS, the Airtraq, and the McCoy Laryngoscopes.

BACKGROUND: Tracheal intubation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a high-risk procedure. The aim of this study was to compare efficacy of intubation with the Pentax AWS, Airtraq, and McCoy laryngoscopes in patients with cervical spine immobilization during resuscitation in a randomized, controlled simulation trial. METHODS: We compared times to intubation, success rate, Cormack and Lehane grading, and ease of intubation when using Pentax AWS, Airtraq, and McCoy in randomized order. RESULTS: Sixty-seven paramedics were trained in the use of the Pentax AWS, Airtraq, and McCoy laryngoscopes with a METIman Prehospital manikin. Participants performed tracheal intubation in patients with cervical spine immobilization during resuscitation scenario. We measured success rates, times for tracheal intubation, the glottic view, and ease of intubation. RESULTS: The primary study end point, overall success rate, was highest when using Pentax AWS (94.0%) and was lower in Airtraq (86.6%; P = .017) and in McCoy (85.1%; P = .019). Time to first effective ventilation was achieved significantly shorter when using Pentax AWS (25.4 ± 6.7 seconds) than Airtraq (35.6 ± 5.1 seconds; P < .001) or McCoy (38.5 ± 10.3 seconds; P < .001). The quality of glottic view and ease of use were best with Pentax AWS. CONCLUSIONS: The Pentax AWS videolaryngoscope provided a better view of the vocal cords, less insertion time, and higher success rate of the endotracheal intubation compared with the Airtraq or McCoy laryngoscopes in adults with simulated cervical spine immobilization during resuscitation.

Effect of Coronary Artery Disease on COVID-19-Prognosis and Risk Assessment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the leading cause of death worldwide. Patients with pre-existing CAD were shown to have a more severe course of COVID-19, but this association has not been clarified. We performed a meta-analysis to determine the association between CAD and COVID-19 outcomes. We searched Scopus, Medline (PubMed), Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases up to 2 November 2021. There were 62 studies with a total population of 49,286 patients included in the meta-analysis. CAD occurrence in survivor vs. non-survivor groups varied and amounted to 9.2% vs. 22.9%, respectively (OR = 0.33; 95%CI: 0.29 to 0.39; I2 = 70%; p < 0.001). CAD was also associated with increased severity of COVID-19 disease and was (10.8% vs. 5.6%, respectively, for severe vs. non-severe groups (OR = 2.28; 95%CI: 1.59 to 3.27; I2 = 72%; p < 0.001). The role of history of CAD in mortality and severe condition in COVID-19 presents itself as prominent-although a risk of bias in retrospective trials needs to be assessed, in case of our meta-analysis the statistically significant results when it comes to higher mortality among patients with CAD compared to non-CAD patients, a more severe condition observed in patients with CAD, and a visibly more frequent admission to intensive care unit in patients with CAD, it seems that an incidence of cardiovascular events plays a role in COVID-19 prognosis.