Lucas vs Manual Compressions in Critical Care
Advisor(s)
Megan Lieb
Confirmation
1
Document Type
Poster
Location
ONU McIntosh Center; McIntosh Activities Room
Start Date
21-4-2023 11:00 AM
End Date
21-4-2023 11:50 AM
Abstract
Abstract
Problem: CPR is very demanding and requires a large number of staff to attempt return of spontaneous circulation. Hospitals are short staffed and there are often not enough providers to adequately staff cardiac arrest situations. LUCAS mechanical compression devices were meant to combat these staffing issues. Introducing LUCAS devices to critical care settings may help combat staffing shortages and increase survival rates following cardiac arrest.
Aim: The purpose of this project is to determine if using the LUCAS mechanical compression device in critical care settings experiencing limited staff would increase patient outcomes compared to manual CPR within 30 days.
Methods: This project will be a retrospective, chart review. Initial return of circulation and 30-day survival rates of patients’ experiencing cardiac arrest in the Cardiovascular ICU who had manual compressions would be compared to those who had LUCAS device compressions.
Conclusion: Most of the studies performed previously were conducted in ambulances and emergency room settings. There is not enough evidence in critical care settings and more research is needed. The use of LUCAS devices in critical care units could be one method to combat staffing shortages during CPR and improve patient outcomes.
Recommended Citation
Carr, Jacob, "Lucas vs Manual Compressions in Critical Care" (2023). ONU Student Research Colloquium. 12.
https://digitalcommons.onu.edu/student_research_colloquium/2023/posters/12
Restricted
Available to ONU community via local IP address and ONU login.
Lucas vs Manual Compressions in Critical Care
ONU McIntosh Center; McIntosh Activities Room
Abstract
Problem: CPR is very demanding and requires a large number of staff to attempt return of spontaneous circulation. Hospitals are short staffed and there are often not enough providers to adequately staff cardiac arrest situations. LUCAS mechanical compression devices were meant to combat these staffing issues. Introducing LUCAS devices to critical care settings may help combat staffing shortages and increase survival rates following cardiac arrest.
Aim: The purpose of this project is to determine if using the LUCAS mechanical compression device in critical care settings experiencing limited staff would increase patient outcomes compared to manual CPR within 30 days.
Methods: This project will be a retrospective, chart review. Initial return of circulation and 30-day survival rates of patients’ experiencing cardiac arrest in the Cardiovascular ICU who had manual compressions would be compared to those who had LUCAS device compressions.
Conclusion: Most of the studies performed previously were conducted in ambulances and emergency room settings. There is not enough evidence in critical care settings and more research is needed. The use of LUCAS devices in critical care units could be one method to combat staffing shortages during CPR and improve patient outcomes.