Cardiac arrest & resuscitation
Automatic Mechanical Ventilation vs Manual Bag Ventilation During CPR: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Authors' conclusion
In this pilot trial, the use of MV instead of BV during CPR was feasible and could serve as a viable alternative.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with medical out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) arriving at the ED
- Participants
- 60 patients
- Comparison
- Automatic mechanical ventilation vs manual bag ventilation during CPR
- Mechanical ventilation (MV)n = 30
- Bag ventilation (BV)n = 30reference
- Primary endpoint
- Any return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC)
Methodological detailspilot
- Pilot
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
P = 0.439
Secondary outcomes
| Outcome | P value |
|---|---|
| Tidal volume and minute volumeMV vs BV · tidal volume significantly lower in MV | P < 0.001 |
| Tidal volume and minute volumeMV vs BV · minute volume significantly lower in MV | P = 0.009 |
Changes in arterial blood gas results (pH, Pco2, Po2, bicarbonate, lactate) during CPR
- No significant differences between groups; P values pH .798, Pco2 0.249, Po2 .515, bicarbonate .876, lactate .878
Original publication
Automatic Mechanical Ventilation vs Manual Bag Ventilation During CPR: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. Chest. Published 18 February 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →