Skip to content Skip to navigation
University of Warwick
  • Study
  • |
  • Research
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Alumni
  • |
  • News
  • |
  • About

University of Warwick
Publications service & WRAP

Highlight your research

  • WRAP
    • Home
    • Search WRAP
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse WRAP by Year
    • Browse WRAP by Subject
    • Browse WRAP by Department
    • Browse WRAP by Funder
    • Browse Theses by Department
  • Publications Service
    • Home
    • Search Publications Service
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse Publications service by Year
    • Browse Publications service by Subject
    • Browse Publications service by Department
    • Browse Publications service by Funder
  • Help & Advice
University of Warwick

The Library

  • Login
  • Admin

Effectiveness of different compression-to-ventilation methods for cardiopulmonary resuscitation : a systematic review

Tools
- Tools
+ Tools

Ashoor, Huda M., Lillie, Erin, Zarin, Wasifa, Pham, Ba’, Khan, Paul A., Nincic, Vera, Yazdi, Fatemeh, Ghassemi, Marco, Ivory, John, Cardoso, Roberta, Perkins, Gavin D., de Caen, Allan R. and Tricco, Andrea C. (2017) Effectiveness of different compression-to-ventilation methods for cardiopulmonary resuscitation : a systematic review. Resuscitation . doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.05.032

[img]
Preview
PDF
WRAP-effectiveness-different-compression-to-ventilation-methods-Perkins-2017.pdf - Accepted Version - Requires a PDF viewer.

Download (809Kb) | Preview
[img] Archive (ZIP)
WRAP-supplementary-material-effectiveness-different-compression-ventilation.zip - Supplemental Material
Embargoed item. Restricted access to Repository staff only

Download (1102Kb)
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.05....

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

Aim:
To compare the effectiveness of different compression-to-ventilation methods during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in patients with cardiac arrest.

Methods:
We searched MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until January 2016. We included experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational studies that compared different chest compression-to-ventilation ratios during CPR for all patients and assessed at least one of the following outcomes: favourable neurological outcomes, survival, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and quality of life. Two reviewers independently screened literature search results, abstracted data, and appraised the risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted separately for randomised and non-randomised studies, as well as study characteristics, such as CPR provider.

Results:
After screening 5703 titles and abstracts and 229 full-text articles, we included 41 studies, of which 13 were companion reports. For adults receiving bystander or dispatcher-instructed CPR, no significant differences were observed across all comparisons and outcomes. Significantly less adults receiving bystander-initiated or plus dispatcher-instructed compression-only CPR experienced favourable neurological outcomes, survival, and ROSC compared to CPR 30:2 (compression-to-ventilation) in un-adjusted analyses in a large cohort study. Evidence from emergency medical service (EMS) CPR providers showed significantly more adults receiving CPR 30:2 experiencing improved favourable neurological outcomes and survival versus those receiving CPR 15:2. Significantly more children receiving CPR 15:2 or 30:2 experienced favourable neurological outcomes, survival, and greater ROSC compared to compression-only CPR. However, for children <1 years of age, no significant differences were observed between CPR 15:2 or 30:2 and compression-only CPR.

Conclusions:
Our results demonstrated that for adults, CPR 30:2 is associated with better survival and favourable neurological outcomes when compared to CPR 15:2. For children, more patients receiving CPR with either 15:2 or 30:2 compression-to ventilation ratio experienced favourable neurological function, survival, and ROSC when compared to CO-CPR for children of all ages, but for children <1 years of age, no statistically significant differences were observed.

Item Type: Journal Article
Subjects: R Medicine > RC Internal medicine
Divisions: Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Clinical Trials Unit
Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences
Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH): CPR (First aid), Cardiac resuscitation, Systematic reviews (Medical research)
Journal or Publication Title: Resuscitation
Publisher: Elsevier Ireland Ltd
ISSN: 0300-9572
Official Date: 2 June 2017
Dates:
DateEvent
2 June 2017Available
31 May 2017Accepted
DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.05.032
Status: Peer Reviewed
Publication Status: Published
Funder: International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR), National Institute for Health Research (Great Britain) (NIHR), Canada Research Chairs (CRC)
Contributors:
ContributionNameContributor ID
Research GroupInternational Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR), Basic Life Support Task ForceUNSPECIFIED

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item View Item
twitter

Email us: wrap@warwick.ac.uk
Contact Details
About Us