Use of an Automated, Load-Distributing Band Chest Compression Device for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Resuscitation

Results Patients in the manual CPR and LDB-CPR phases were comparable except for a faster response time interval (mean difference, 26 seconds) and more EMS-witnessed arrests (18.7% vs 12.6%) with LDB. Rates for ROSC and survival were increased with LDB-CPR compared with manual CPR (for ROSC, 34.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 29.2%-40.3% vs 20.2%; 95% CI, 16.9%-24.0%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.94; 95% CI,1.38-2.72;forsurvivaltohospitaladmission,20.9%;95%CI,16.6%-26.1%vs11.1%; 95% CI, 8.6%-14.2%; adjusted OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.23-2.86; and for survival to hospital discharge, 9.7%; 95% CI, 6.7%-13.8% vs 2.9%; 95% CI, 1.7%-4.8%; adjusted OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.11-4.77). In secondary analysis of the 210 patients in whom the LDB device was applied, 38 patients (18.1%) survived to hospital admission (95% CI, 13.4%-23.9%) and 12 patients (5.7%) survived to hospital discharge (95% CI, 3.0%9.3%). Among patients in the manual CPR and LDB-CPR groups who survived to hospital discharge, there was no significant difference between groups in Cerebral Performance Category (P=.36) or Overall Performance Category (P=.40). The number needed to treat for the adjusted outcome survival to discharge was 15 (95% CI, 9-33).