Mechanical Versus Manual Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

NCT ID: NCT04422938

Last Updated: 2020-06-09

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

303 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2016-01-01

Study Completion Date

2018-03-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

In this study, the investigators compared mechanical and manual chest compressions in in-hospital cardiac arrest cases.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

In this study, the investigators analyzed cardiopulmonary resuscitations performed over a 2-year period in an emergency department of a training and research hospital and compared success of manual and mechanical chest compressions in terms of return of spontaneous circulation, 30-day survival, and hospital discharge. Investigators present the study as an in-hospital cardiac arrest study; however, all of the resuscitation performed in the cases included in the study were performed in the emergency department.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Cardiac Arrest Resuscitation

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

COHORT

Study Time Perspective

RETROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Manuel compression

Manuel chest compressions will be handled by clinicians

Manuel chest compressions handled by clinicians

Intervention Type OTHER

Compressions will be handled by human efforts

Mechanical compression

Mechanical chest compressions will be handled via mechanical chest compression device

LUCAS™ 2 Chest Compression System

Intervention Type DEVICE

LUCAS-2 model piston-based mechanical chest compression device was used for mechanical chest compressions

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Manuel chest compressions handled by clinicians

Compressions will be handled by human efforts

Intervention Type OTHER

LUCAS™ 2 Chest Compression System

LUCAS-2 model piston-based mechanical chest compression device was used for mechanical chest compressions

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

Over 18 age Cardiac arrest cases In-hospital cardiac arrest cases Resuscitations performed in emergency department

Exclusion Criteria

\<18 age
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Ankara Training and Research Hospital

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Ankara City Hospital Bilkent

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Alp Şener

Clinical Assistant Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University, School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine

Ankara, Çankaya, Turkey (Türkiye)

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Turkey (Türkiye)

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Couper K, Yeung J, Nicholson T, Quinn T, Lall R, Perkins GD. Mechanical chest compression devices at in-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Resuscitation. 2016 Jun;103:24-31. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2016.03.004. Epub 2016 Mar 11.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26976675 (View on PubMed)

Couper K, Quinn T, Lall R, Devrell A, Orriss B, Seers K, Yeung J, Perkins GD; COMPRESS-RCT collaborators. Mechanical versus manual chest compressions in the treatment of in-hospital cardiac arrest patients in a non-shockable rhythm: a randomised controlled feasibility trial (COMPRESS-RCT). Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2018 Aug 30;26(1):70. doi: 10.1186/s13049-018-0538-6.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 30165909 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

medybu-IN

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

CPR Feedback Devices
NCT02293200 UNKNOWN NA
Effectiveness of CPR Pillow
NCT07160881 ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION NA