Braunecker, S., Douglas, B. and Hinkelbein, J. (2015). Comparison of different techniques for in microgravity-a simple mathematic estimation of cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality for space environment. Am. J. Emerg. Med., 33 (7). S. 920 - 925. PHILADELPHIA: W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC. ISSN 1532-8171

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Background: Since astronauts are selected carefully, are usually young, and are intensively observed before and during training, relevant medical problems are rare. Nevertheless, there is a certain risk for a cardiac arrest in space requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Up to now, there are 5 known techniques to perform CPR in microgravity. The aim of the present study was to analyze different techniques for CPR during microgravity about quality of CPR. Material and methods: To identify relevant publications on CPR quality in microgravity, a systematic analysis with defined searching criteria was performed in the PubMed database (http://www.pubmed.com). For analysis, the keywords (reanimation or CPR or resuscitation) and (space or microgravity or weightlessness) and the specific names of the techniques (Standard-technique or Straddling-manoeuvre or Reverse-bear-hugtechnique or Evetts-Russomano-technique or Hand-stand-technique) were used. To compare quality and effectiveness of different techniques, we used the compression product (CP), a mathematical estimation for cardiac output. Results: Using the predefined keywords for literature search, 4 different publications were identified (parabolic flight or under simulated conditions on earth) dealing with CPR efforts in microgravity and giving specific numbers. No study was performed under real-space conditions. Regarding compression depth, the handstand (HS) technique as well as the reverse bear hug (RBH) technique met parameters of the guidelines for CPR in 1G environments best (HS ratio, 0.91 +/- 0.07; RBH ratio, 0.82 +/- 0.13). Concerning compression rate, 4 of 5 techniques reached the required compression rate (ratio: HS, 1.08 +/- 0.11; Evetts-Russomano [ER], 1.01 +/- 0.06; standard side straddle, 1.00 +/- 0.03; and straddling maneuver, 1.03 +/- 0.12). The RBH method did not meet the required criteria (0.89 +/- 0.09). The HS method showed the highest cardiac output (69.3% above the required CP), followed by the ER technique (33.0% above the required CP). Conclusions: Concerning CPR quality, the HS seems to be most effective to treat a cardiac arrest. In some environmental conditions where this technique cannot be used, the ER technique is a good alternative because CPR quality is only slightly lower. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Item Type: Journal Article
Creators:
CreatorsEmailORCIDORCID Put Code
Braunecker, S.UNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Douglas, B.UNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Hinkelbein, J.UNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
URN: urn:nbn:de:hbz:38-399922
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.04.018
Journal or Publication Title: Am. J. Emerg. Med.
Volume: 33
Number: 7
Page Range: S. 920 - 925
Date: 2015
Publisher: W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
Place of Publication: PHILADELPHIA
ISSN: 1532-8171
Language: English
Faculty: Unspecified
Divisions: Unspecified
Subjects: no entry
Uncontrolled Keywords:
KeywordsLanguage
BASIC LIFE-SUPPORT; AUTOMATED EXTERNAL DEFIBRILLATORS; COUNCIL GUIDELINES; SECTION 2Multiple languages
Emergency MedicineMultiple languages
URI: http://kups.ub.uni-koeln.de/id/eprint/39992

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Altmetric

Export

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item