logo

LUCAS-2 Mechanical CPR in Front-Line Emergency Response Vehicles: A Medical Case Study

6 Pages1491 Words265 Views
   

Added on  2020-01-06

About This Document

Medical case study Aim3 Type of Study 3 Setting 3 Population 3 Methodology 3 Analysis 4 Results and Findings4 Discussion and Level of Evidence 5 REFERENCES 6 1 Aim “Whether the introduction of LUCAS-2 mechanical CPR into front-line emergency response vehicles would improve survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.” 2 Type of Study The study was conducted with the help of randomised control trials with the services offered by vehicles as the main unit of randomisation (Gssler and et.

LUCAS-2 Mechanical CPR in Front-Line Emergency Response Vehicles: A Medical Case Study

   Added on 2020-01-06

ShareRelated Documents
Medical case study
LUCAS-2 Mechanical CPR in Front-Line Emergency Response Vehicles: A Medical Case Study_1
Table of ContentsAim..................................................................................................................................................3Type of Study...................................................................................................................................3Setting..............................................................................................................................................3Population........................................................................................................................................3Methodology....................................................................................................................................3Analysis...........................................................................................................................................4Results and Findings........................................................................................................................4Discussion and Level of Evidence...................................................................................................5REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................................6
LUCAS-2 Mechanical CPR in Front-Line Emergency Response Vehicles: A Medical Case Study_2
Aim“Whether the introduction of LUCAS-2 mechanical CPR into front-line emergency responsevehicles would improvesurvival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.”Type of StudyThe study was conducted with the help of randomised control trials with the services offeredby vehicles as the main unit of randomisation (Gässler and et.al, 2015). The overall study wasconducted in partnership with 4 UK based national healthcare service centres. Individual patientwere selected in the study if the travel ambulance was recorded to be the first vehicle to be presenton the scene. The ambulance service was directed to present all the data recorded through thevariables of cardiac arrest to central trail databases. The enrolment procedure proceeded with thehelp of consent form under the mental capacity Act 2005 (Steinberg and et.al, 2016).SettingEven though mechanical chest compression has recorded to produce high potential ofmaintaining cardiopulmonary resuscitation but the result drawn from various researches are not ableto justify the effectiveness of use of mechanical chest in retaining the cardiopulmonary rate inindividuals who have encountered cardiac arrest (Kugytė and Šliburytė, 2015). The overall researchis based on the study that whether the use of LUCAS-2 mechanical CPR in front-line emergencyresponse vehicle would probably increase the survival rate of patient who has undergone out ofhospital cardiac arrest.PopulationThe study enrolled a total of 4471 eligible patients which were categorized into two differentgroups (Rothwell and et.al, 2012). Out of the selected participants 1652 individuals were directed tomechanical chest compression with the help of LUCAS-2 and 2819 people were directed to join thecontrol group. Out of 1652 patients 60% of them received mechanical chest compression whereas11% of them received LUCAS-2 from the control group. Overall 91 ambulance station wereselected depending upon the locations so that they are able to coordinate in emergency response(Perkins and et.al, 2015). The vehicles were dispatched to the places were there were immediatechances of cardiac arrest in the patients (Vasylev and et.al, 2013). All the patients who have beendischarged from the hospital were informed prior to the research so that they are able to participatein the ongoing study. A consent information form was being filled by all the population so that theycan take part in follow up trials after 3-12 months of cardiac arrest.MethodologyThe overall study is based on randomised control trials for the assessment of mechanicalcompression device in the case of cardiac arrest. It was a cluster based open label trial where non
LUCAS-2 Mechanical CPR in Front-Line Emergency Response Vehicles: A Medical Case Study_3

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Mechanical versus manual chest compression for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC): a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial
|12
|11588
|127

Safety with Mechanical Chest Compressions in CPR: Clinical studies with the LUCAS™ device
|70
|21472
|64

Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|10
|6758
|122

Percutaneous noncoronary interventions during continuous mechanical chest compression with the LUCAS-2 device
|4
|1909
|361

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation and ethics
|5
|4351
|441

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Life Sustaining Treatment (DOC)
|9
|1782
|42