Mechanical CPR

High quality manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) with minimal delays has been shown to improve outcomes following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). There are concerns that the quality of CPR can diminish over time and as little as 1 minute of CPR can lead to fatigue and deviation from the current recommended rate and depth of compressions.

With this in mind, a mechanical device to provide chest compressions at a constant rate, depth and without tiring has considerable theoretical benefits to patients, yet clinical equipoise remains about the role for this treatment modality.

In this podcast, we discuss and critically appraise 2 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) set out to answer exactly that question and give our take on the role for mechanical CPR devices in the future

Hope you enjoy and feel free to leave any feedback below!


References & Related Articles

Mechanical versus manual chest compression for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC): a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. Perkins GD. Lancet. 2015

Mechanical chest compressions and simultaneous defibrillation vs conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the LINC randomized trial. Rubertsson S. JAMA. 2014

The SGEM; CPR-Man or Machine?

R.E.B.E.L. EM; CPR in Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest; Man vs Machine


  • simon says:

    Thank you so much for this podcast. I am currently Critiquing the Paramedic trial for my EBP module at UWE and this has been extremely helpful in confirming my thoughts on the paper.

Leave a Reply

© 2024 The Resus Room