Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Prehospital randomised assessment of a mechanical compression device in cardiac arrest (PaRAMeDIC) trial protocol\ud

By Gavin D. Perkins, Malcolm Woollard, Matthew Cooke, Charles D. Deakin, Jessica Horton, Ranjit Lall, S. E. Lamb, Chris McCabe, Tom Quinn, Anne Slowther and Simon Gates

Abstract

Background\ud Survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is closely linked to the quality of CPR, but in real life, resuscitation during pre-hospital care and ambulance transport is often suboptimal. Mechanical chest compression devices deliver consistent chest compressions, are not prone to fatigue and could potentially overcome some of the limitations of manual chest compression. However, there is no high-quality evidence that they improve clinical outcomes, or that they are cost effective. The Pre-hospital Randomised Assessment of a Mechanical Compression Device In Cardiac Arrest (PARAMEDIC) trial is a pragmatic cluster randomised study of the LUCAS-2 device in adult patients with non-traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.\ud \ud Methods\ud The primary objective of this trial is to evaluate the effect of chest compression using LUCAS-2 on mortality at 30 days post out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, compared with manual chest compression. Secondary objectives of the study are to evaluate the effects of LUCAS-2 on survival to 12 months, cognitive and quality of life outcomes and cost-effectiveness. Methods: Ambulance service vehicles will be randomised to either manual compression (control) or LUCAS arms. Adult patients in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, attended by a trial vehicle will be eligible for inclusion. Patients with traumatic cardiac arrest or who are pregnant will be excluded. The trial will recruit approximately 4000 patients from England, Wales and Scotland. A waiver of initial consent has been approved by the Research Ethics Committees. Consent will be sought from survivors for participation in the follow-up phase. \ud \ud Conclusion\ud The trial will assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of the LUCAS-2 mechanical chest compression device. Trial Registration: The trial is registered on the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry (ISRCTN08233942). \ud \u

Topics: R1
Publisher: BioMed central Ltd.
Year: 2010
OAI identifier: oai:wrap.warwick.ac.uk:3621

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. A randomised controlled trial of the LUCAS mechanical compression/decompression device for out of hospital cardiac arrest. doi
  2. Advanced cardiac life support guidelines [http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/med/research/hsri/emergencycare/prehospitalcare/jr calcstakeholderwebsite/guidelines/adult_advanced_life_support_als_2006.pdf]
  3. (2008). Calculation of sample size for stroke trials assessing functional outcome: comparison of binary and ordinal approaches. doi
  4. (1999). Cobbe SM: Seasonal variations in out of hospital cardiopulmonary arrest. Heart doi
  5. Committee JRCAL: National Cardiac Arrest Audit Report.
  6. (2005). Committee on Resuscitation: doi
  7. (1998). Council: MRC guidelines for good clinical practice in clinical trials. London: Medical Research Council; doi
  8. (2009). DJ: Bias in identifying and recruiting participants in cluster randomised trials: what can be done? BMJ doi
  9. (2005). GD: Advanced Life Support Guidelines for the UK. In Resuscitation Guidelines for the UK. Edited by Handley A: Resuscitation Council (UK) doi
  10. (2004). group C: CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials.[see comment]. BMJ
  11. (2003). Interaction revisited: the difference between two estimates.[see comment]. BMJ doi
  12. JA: Decay in quality of closed-chest compressions over time. Annals of Emergency Medicine doi
  13. (2006). LB: Effects of compression depth and pre-shock pauses predict defibrillation failure during cardiac arrest. Resuscitation doi
  14. London Ambulance Service Cardiac Arrest doi
  15. (2009). Mechanical chest compression devices--will we ever get the evidence? Resuscitation doi
  16. (2010). Mechanical chest-compression devices: current and future roles. Curr Opin Crit Care doi
  17. (2006). PA: Quality of out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation with real time automated feedback: a prospective interventional study. Resuscitation doi
  18. (1994). Quality of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation influences outcome after prehospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation doi
  19. (2005). Rea TD: Incidence of EMS-treated out-ofhospital cardiac arrest in Europe. Resuscitation doi
  20. Recognition of Life Extinct by Ambulance Clinicians [http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/med/research/hsri/emergencycare/prehospitalcare/jr calcstakeholderwebsite/guidelines/recognition_of_life_extinct_by_ambulance_clinici ans_2006.pdf]
  21. (2010). RW: Global incidences of out-ofhospital cardiac arrest and survival rates: Systematic review of 67 prospective studies. Resuscitation doi
  22. (1995). SD: How to Score the SF-12 Physical and Mental Health Summaries: A User’s Manual.
  23. (2002). Sjoberg T: Evaluation of LUCAS, a new device for automatic mechanical compression and active decompression resuscitation. Resuscitation doi
  24. (2004). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Medical Care doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.