LUCAS Device for CPR

[thegenius]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Larik, et. al. Comparison of manual chest compression versus mechanical chest compression for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine 103(8)😛 e37294, February 23, 2024

I stumbled across this systematic review and meta-analysis of manual vs. mechanical (e.g. LUCAS) CPR device. The meta-analysis has n=111,000 patients across 24 studies. The results were

No statistically significant differences between manual and mechanical CPR For
- obtaining ROSC
- survical to hospital discharrge
- short-term survival
- long-term survical.

Also, and more importantly, manual chest compression was associated with significalty superior neuro outcomes (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.07-1.84, P=0.01). This means patients receiving manual CPR had 41% higher odds of favorable neurological outcomes compared to those receiving mechanical CPR.

Seems like there is no point in using mechanical CPR devices in almost all cases. Certainly not in the ED where we have multiple hands ready to do CPR.

Are folks on here aware of this study? (I was not, and I thought that for the most part mechanical CPR was non-inferior to manual.)

And are people working in ER's that no longer use LUCAS to do CPR?

 

[AlmostAnMD]

Laziness

 

[EMdoc235]

Laziness

Our ER nurses and technicians prefer a hands-off approach to pretty much everything.

 

[Apollyon]

Laziness

At the same time, the teaching is, if you're not fatigued after 2 minutes of performing CPR, you're not doing it right.

Also, my anecdotal experience was only paid crews (i.e. 2 person) were using the Lucas.

 

[JacobMcCandles]

I think it’s a good option pre-hospital for EMS crews but I immediately remove them once they’re in the ED.