{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0444104134762634, 'fraction_numerical': 0.018887187340479835, 'mean_word_length': 5.222222222222222, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
THE IMPACT OF A NEW CPR ASSIST DEVICE ON RATE OF RETURN OF SPONTANEOUS CIRCULATION IN OUT-OF-HOSPITAL CARDIAC ARREST

Objective. The San Francisco Fire Department deployed an automated, load-distributing-band chest compression device (AutoPulse, Revivant Corporation) to evaluate its function in a large urban emergency medical services (EMS) service. A retrospective chart review was undertaken to determine whether the AutoPulse had altered short-term patient outcome, specifically, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Methods. AutoPulse cardiopulmonary resuscitation (A-CPR) was used by paramedic captains responding to adult cardiac arrests with an average ±SD response time of 15 ± 5 minutes. The primary endpoint was patient arrival to an emergency department with measurable spontaneous pulses. The manual CPR comparison group was case-matched for age, gender, initial presenting electrocardiogram rhythm, andthe number of doses of Advanced Cardiac Life Support medications as a proxy for treatment time. Matching was performed by an investigator blinded to outcome andtreatment group. Results. Sixty-nine AutoPulse uses were matched to 93 manual-CPR-only cases. A-CPR showed improvement in the primary outcome when compared with manual CPR with any presenting rhythm (A-CPR 39%, manual 29%, p = 0.003). When patients were classified by first presenting rhythm, shockable rhythms showed no difference in outcome (A-CPR 44%, manual 50%, p = 0.340). Outcome was improved with A-CPR in initial presenting asystole andapproached significance with pulseless electrical activity (PEA)(asystole: A-CPR 37%, manual 22%, p = 0.008; PEA: A-CPR 38%, manual 23%, p = 0.079). Conclusion. The AutoPulse may improve the overall likelihood of sustained ROSC andmay particularly benefit patients with nonshockable rhythms. A prospective randomized trial comparing the AutoPulse with manual CPR in the setting of out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest is under way.