Disclaimer for the US market

The products and information provided on this website are intended for healthcare professionals. These products are not for sale or distribution in the United States and statements made regarding these products have not been evaluated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The efficacy of these products has not been confirmed by FDA-approved research and these products are therefore not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. All information presented here is for general information purposes only and not meant as a substitute for or alternative to advice from healthcare practitioners. The Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act requires this notice.

Neither the Company nor its representatives is providing any medical advice, and none should be inferred, from any ideas, suggestions, testimonials or other information set forth on this website or in other Company materials or provided over the phone, in the mail, in product packaging, or in email correspondence. This website may contain links to third-party websites. The Company provides these links as a convenience only and does not endorse any of these sites. The Company is not responsible for the content of, and does not make any representations regarding the materials on, such linked third-party websites. If you decide to access or rely on information at linked third-party website, you do so at our own risk. Our terms and conditions, including disclaimers, are more fully set forth in our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Terms of Online Sales.

Differences between manual CPR and corpuls cpr in regard to quality and outcome: study protocol of the comparing observational multi‐center prospective registry study on resuscitation (COMPRESS)

Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, Ausgabe 2021

Background

Chest compression is the key procedure during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. High quality chest compression is essential for survival with favorable neurological recovery after cardiac arrest [ 1]. With manual CPR, increasing fatigue of rescuers and frequent interruptions of compressions have been reported [ 2]. Both fatigue and interruptions decrease chest compression quality and the generated blood flow. High performance chest compressions have been shown to improve survival rates, compared to insufficiently performed chest compressions [ 3, 4].

For that reason, several mechanical CPR devices with different compression methods have been developed. These devices perform chest compressions through inflatable vests, mechanical pistons or load distributing bands. The most frequently used devices are LUCAS (piston-driven) (manufactured by Stryker Medical) and AutoPulse (load distributing band) (manufactured by ZOLL medical).

Fortsetzung: https://www.springermedizin.de/differences-between-manual-cpr-and-corpuls-cpr-in-regard-to-qual/18903900?fulltextView=true

Pressekontakt

Resuscitec GmbH
Engesserstraße 4
D-79108 Freiburg
press@resuscitec.de

Disclaimer

Sie erhalten das Presseclipping der Resuscitec GmbH aufgrund Ihrer Beziehung zu unserem Unternehmen. Wir verarbeiten Ihre Daten auf Grundlage unseres berechtigten Interesses zum Zweck der persönlichen Ansprache und zum Versand unseres Presseclippings. Verantwortlich für die Datenverarbeitung ist die Resuscitec GmbH. Weitere Informationen zum Datenschutz finden Sie in unseren Datenschutzhinweisen. Sie können der Verarbeitung Ihrer personenbezogenen Daten für den Versand des Presseclippings jederzeit formlos widersprechen.

Nutzungshinweis

Aus urheberrechtlichen Gründen dürfen die Artikel weder in digitaler noch ausgedruckter Form an Dritte weitergegeben werden. Sie sind nur zum persönlichen Gebrauch bestimmt, der Aufbau einer Datenbank mit digitalisierten Artikeln ist nicht erlaubt.