Search

Background: High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is important for increased survival and improved neurological outcome. Chest compression fraction measures the proportion of time chest compressions are given during a cardiac arrest resuscitation. Chest compression fraction has not been compared with the quality of chest compressions delivered at the recommended rate and depth of 100-120/min and 2.0-2.4 inches, respectively., Objectives: We evaluate whether chest compression fraction correlates with compressions at a target rate of 100-120/min and depth of 2.0-2.4 inches in chest diameter., Methods: A prospective, observational study design was used to compare chest compression fraction to compressions in target in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients in a prehospital urban setting. We include all adult, non-traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with a resuscitation attempt during January 1, 2019 through September 30, 2019, for a total of 9 months. Spearman's rank correlation was used to determine correlation between compression fraction and compressions in target., Results: A total of 120 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases were included in the study. We found a high chest compression fraction median of 83% (interquartile range 72-90%), but a low compression in target median of 13% (interquartile range 5-29%). There was no significant correlation between chest compression fraction and compressions in target when analyzed linearly (Spearman's Rho = 0.165, p = 0.072). No difference was found when dichotomizing chest compression fraction into high and low variables in comparison with compressions in target (14% vs. 10%, p = 0.119)., Conclusion: Chest compression fraction is not associated with compressions in target for rate and depth for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cardiopulmonary resuscitation., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The association between ambulation at the scene of a motor vehicle collision (MVC) and spinal injury has never been quantified., Objective: To evaluate the association between ambulation and spinal injury in patients involved in a MVC., Methods: Prospective analytical-observational cohort study. Inclusion: patients sustaining traumatic injury in a MVC. Exclusion: < 18 years old, pregnancy., Primary Outcome: spinal injury defined as injury to the cervical, thoracic, or lumbar spinal cord, bones, or ligaments. Secondary outcome: Injury resulting in neurological deficit, need for surgery, or death. A generalized linear model was used to evaluate the association between outcome and predictor variables. Risk ratios [RR] were reported with a point estimate and 95% confidence interval (CI). A two-tailed alpha of < 0.05 was the threshold for statistical significance., Results: There were 704 patients analyzed. Nonambulatory patients were 2.29 times more likely to sustain a spinal injury, compared to ambulatory patients (RR 2.29, 95% CI 1.34-3.91). Patients ≥ 65 years of age were 3.27 times more likely to sustain a spinal injury (RR 3.27, 95% CI 1.66-6.45). Patients with a Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤ 8 were 4.93 times more likely to sustain a spinal injury (RR 4.93, 95% CI 1.86-13.10)., Conclusion: In this prospective analytical-observational study evaluating the association between ambulatory status and spinal injury in patients involved in MVCs, we observed that those patients who were nonambulatory were more than two times as likely to have a spinal injury compared to those patients who were ambulatory at the scene., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)