Mechanical vs Manual CPR
Advisor(s)
Jamie Hunsicker DNP, MS, RN
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
Efficient and effective CPR is challenging in the prehospital setting due to the lack of staff, lack of resources, and having to code a patient in the back of a moving vehicle. These problems led to the creation of the mechanical CPR device. But, the evidence of the benefits of the mechanical CPR devices versus doing manual CPR are controversial.
Purpose
The aim of this research project is to determine if manual or mechanical CPR is superior in terms of positive patient outcomes. The outcomes are obtaining the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to discharge, survival to discharge with favorable neurologic outcomes, and lack of injury related to CPR.
Methods
This is a quantitative quasi experimental retrospective project. This project will gather information from local emergency departments and fire/rescue departments about past cardiac arrests. The outcomes of the patients will be split between manual and mechanical CPR and compared.
Conclusion
This researcher believes the research project will not find significant evidence that mechanical or manual CPR is overall superior. This researcher also believes that mechanical CPR will be linked to a higher risk of injury related to CPR.
Recommended Citation
Sealscott, Faith, "Mechanical vs Manual CPR" (2023). ONU Student Research Colloquium. 15.
https://digitalcommons.onu.edu/student_research_colloquium/2023/posters/15
Restricted
Available to ONU community via local IP address and ONU login.
Mechanical vs Manual CPR
ONU McIntosh Center; McIntosh Activities Room
Abstract
Problem
Efficient and effective CPR is challenging in the prehospital setting due to the lack of staff, lack of resources, and having to code a patient in the back of a moving vehicle. These problems led to the creation of the mechanical CPR device. But, the evidence of the benefits of the mechanical CPR devices versus doing manual CPR are controversial.
Purpose
The aim of this research project is to determine if manual or mechanical CPR is superior in terms of positive patient outcomes. The outcomes are obtaining the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to discharge, survival to discharge with favorable neurologic outcomes, and lack of injury related to CPR.
Methods
This is a quantitative quasi experimental retrospective project. This project will gather information from local emergency departments and fire/rescue departments about past cardiac arrests. The outcomes of the patients will be split between manual and mechanical CPR and compared.
Conclusion
This researcher believes the research project will not find significant evidence that mechanical or manual CPR is overall superior. This researcher also believes that mechanical CPR will be linked to a higher risk of injury related to CPR.