Survival from Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest - Comparing the Automated LUCAS-2 Device and Manual CPR.

INTRODUCTION:Competency in and understanding of the factors impacting cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) are key to emergency medicine. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the automated LUCAS-2 device on survival to emergency department (ED) compared to manual CPR as part of the EMS response using a large data set collected in a mostly rural U.S. state. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective analysis of South Dakota's electronic Patient Care Reports (ePCR) collected from Jan. 1, 2013 through Dec. 31, 2015. The primary outcome measure was survival to ED. RESULTS:A mechanical piston device (LUCAS-2), was utilized in 260 (15 percent) of 1,781 total cases during this period. The odds for survival to ED were calculated and compared between manual and LUCAS-2-assisted CPR. The odds ratio for survival to ED using compressions alone was 3.94 compared to LUCAS-2 and those results persisted after adjusting for significant covariates. DISCUSSION:Despite hemodynamic benefits associated with the LUCAS-2 device in the laboratory and in other settings, this and other studies indicate that compression-only CPR outperforms automation-assisted CPR during OHCA. However, the data also suggest that enhanced training of emergency providers to improve response times and levels of expertise with the equipment may improve the outcomes associated with the LUCAS-2 and it is recommended that further training should be pursued.