Ambulance Transportation - Explore the Science & Experts | ideXlab

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Ambulance Transportation

The Experts below are selected from a list of 513 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Pei Chung Chen – 1st expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • a stabilization device that promotes the efficiency of cardiopulmonary resuscitation during Ambulance Transportation to the level as under non moving conditions
    PLOS ONE, 2014
    Co-Authors: Jer Hao Chang, Shih Bin Su, Kowtong Chen, Ching Fa Cheng, Pei Chung Chen

    Abstract:

    Background
    The survival rate of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is low, and measures to improve the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during Ambulance Transportation are desirable. We designed a stabilization device, and in a randomized crossover trial we found performing CPR in a moving Ambulance with the device (MD) could achieve better efficiency than that without the device (MND), but the efficiency was lower than that in a non-moving Ambulance (NM).
    Purpose
    To evaluate whether a modified version of the stabilization device, can promote further the quality of CPR during Ambulance Transportation.
    Methods
    Participants of the previous study were recruited, and they performed CPR for 10 minutes in a moving Ambulance with the modified version of the stabilization device (MVSD). The primary outcomes were effective chest compressions and no-flow fraction recorded by a skill-reporter manikin. The secondary outcomes included back pain, physiological parameters, and the participants’ rating about the device after performing CPR.
    Results
    The overall effective compressions in 10 minutes were 86.4±17.5% for NM, 60.9±14.6% for MND, 69.7±22.4% for MD, and 86.6%±13.2% for MVSD (p<0.001). Whereas changes in back pain severity and physiology parameters were similar under all conditions, MVSD had the lowest no-flow fraction. Differences in effective compressions and the no-flow fraction between MVSD and NM did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions The use of the modified device can improve quality of CPR in a moving Ambulance to a level similar to that in a non-moving condition without increasing the severity of back pain.

  • A stabilization device that promotes the efficiency of cardiopulmonary resuscitation during Ambulance Transportation to the level as under non-moving conditions
    PLOS ONE, 2014
    Co-Authors: Jer Hao Chang, Kowtong Chen, Ching Fa Cheng, Pei Chung Chen

    Abstract:

    Background
    The survival rate of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is low, and measures to improve the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during Ambulance Transportation are desirable. We designed a stabilization device, and in a randomized crossover trial we found performing CPR in a moving Ambulance with the device (MD) could achieve better efficiency than that without the device (MND), but the efficiency was lower than that in a non-moving Ambulance (NM).
    Purpose
    To evaluate whether a modified version of the stabilization device, can promote further the quality of CPR during Ambulance Transportation.
    Methods
    Participants of the previous study were recruited, and they performed CPR for 10 minutes in a moving Ambulance with the modified version of the stabilization device (MVSD). The primary outcomes were effective chest compressions and no-flow fraction recorded by a skill-reporter manikin. The secondary outcomes included back pain, physiological parameters, and the participants’ rating about the device after performing CPR.
    Results
    The overall effective compressions in 10 minutes were 86.4±17.5% for NM, 60.9±14.6% for MND, 69.7±22.4% for MD, and 86.6%±13.2% for MVSD (p

  • a stabilization device to improve the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation during Ambulance Transportation a randomized crossover trial
    Resuscitation, 2013
    Co-Authors: Jer Hao Chang, Shih Bin Su, Kowtong Chen, Ching Fa Cheng, Pei Chung Chen

    Abstract:

    Abstract Background The quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during Ambulance Transportation is suboptimal, and therefore measures that can improve the quality are desirable. Purpose To evaluate whether the use of a stabilization device can improve the quality of CPR during Ambulance Transportation. Methods This randomized controlled crossover trial enrolled 22 experienced Ambulance officers. Each participant performed CPR in an Ambulance under three conditions with 72h apart, each condition for 10min: non-moving (NM), moving without device (MND), and moving with device (MD). The sequences of conditions were randomized. The primary outcomes were effective chest compressions recorded by the Laerdal Resusci-Anne Skill-reporter manikin. The secondary outcomes included the severity of back pain scored using the Brief Pain Inventory short-form, the physiology parameter before and after CPR, and the changes in postural stability which was represented by the sway index (SI) of lower back measured using a goniometer. Results The overall effective compressions in 10min were 87.0±17% for NM, 59.0±19% for MND, and 69.0±23% for MD ( p vs. 0.29, p Conclusions The use of a stabilization device can improve the quality of CPR and posture stability during Ambulance Transportation, although the effects on the severity of back pain were not significant.

Yong Li – 2nd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • effect of a stabilization device for maintaining the balance of a cpr performer during Ambulance Transportation on quality of cpr in out of hospital cardiac arrest a prospective randomized controlled trial
    Chinese critical care medicine, 2017
    Co-Authors: Shunyi Feng, Bo Wang, Yong Li

    Abstract:

    OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of a stabilization device for maintaining the balance of a cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performer during Ambulance Transportation on quality of CPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial was performed. 167 OHCA patients with cardiac arrest (CA) time < 10 minutes admitted to Cangzhou Central Hospital from October 2014 to January 2017 were enrolled, and divided into armed stabilization device group (n = 86) and unarmed stabilization device group (n = 81) by random number table. Restoration of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rate, 24-hour survival rate and survival rate of discharge were evaluated. RESULTS: Compared with unarmed stabilization device group, ROSC rate (29.1% vs. 9.9%, χ2 = 9.691, P = 0.002), 24-hour survival rate (20.9% vs. 6.2%, χ2 = 7.649, P = 0.006) and survival rate of discharge (12.8% vs. 3.7%, χ2 = 4.485, P = 0.035) were significant increased in armed stabilization device group. CONCLUSIONS: CPR with stabilization device during Ambulance transport could effectively ensure quality of CPR and improve prognosis in OHCA. Clinical Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-IPR-14005337.

Jer Hao Chang – 3rd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • a stabilization device that promotes the efficiency of cardiopulmonary resuscitation during Ambulance Transportation to the level as under non moving conditions
    PLOS ONE, 2014
    Co-Authors: Jer Hao Chang, Shih Bin Su, Kowtong Chen, Ching Fa Cheng, Pei Chung Chen

    Abstract:

    Background
    The survival rate of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is low, and measures to improve the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during Ambulance Transportation are desirable. We designed a stabilization device, and in a randomized crossover trial we found performing CPR in a moving Ambulance with the device (MD) could achieve better efficiency than that without the device (MND), but the efficiency was lower than that in a non-moving Ambulance (NM).
    Purpose
    To evaluate whether a modified version of the stabilization device, can promote further the quality of CPR during Ambulance Transportation.
    Methods
    Participants of the previous study were recruited, and they performed CPR for 10 minutes in a moving Ambulance with the modified version of the stabilization device (MVSD). The primary outcomes were effective chest compressions and no-flow fraction recorded by a skill-reporter manikin. The secondary outcomes included back pain, physiological parameters, and the participants’ rating about the device after performing CPR.
    Results
    The overall effective compressions in 10 minutes were 86.4±17.5% for NM, 60.9±14.6% for MND, 69.7±22.4% for MD, and 86.6%±13.2% for MVSD (p<0.001). Whereas changes in back pain severity and physiology parameters were similar under all conditions, MVSD had the lowest no-flow fraction. Differences in effective compressions and the no-flow fraction between MVSD and NM did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions The use of the modified device can improve quality of CPR in a moving Ambulance to a level similar to that in a non-moving condition without increasing the severity of back pain.

  • A stabilization device that promotes the efficiency of cardiopulmonary resuscitation during Ambulance Transportation to the level as under non-moving conditions
    PLOS ONE, 2014
    Co-Authors: Jer Hao Chang, Kowtong Chen, Ching Fa Cheng, Pei Chung Chen

    Abstract:

    Background
    The survival rate of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is low, and measures to improve the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during Ambulance Transportation are desirable. We designed a stabilization device, and in a randomized crossover trial we found performing CPR in a moving Ambulance with the device (MD) could achieve better efficiency than that without the device (MND), but the efficiency was lower than that in a non-moving Ambulance (NM).
    Purpose
    To evaluate whether a modified version of the stabilization device, can promote further the quality of CPR during Ambulance Transportation.
    Methods
    Participants of the previous study were recruited, and they performed CPR for 10 minutes in a moving Ambulance with the modified version of the stabilization device (MVSD). The primary outcomes were effective chest compressions and no-flow fraction recorded by a skill-reporter manikin. The secondary outcomes included back pain, physiological parameters, and the participants’ rating about the device after performing CPR.
    Results
    The overall effective compressions in 10 minutes were 86.4±17.5% for NM, 60.9±14.6% for MND, 69.7±22.4% for MD, and 86.6%±13.2% for MVSD (p

  • a stabilization device to improve the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation during Ambulance Transportation a randomized crossover trial
    Resuscitation, 2013
    Co-Authors: Jer Hao Chang, Shih Bin Su, Kowtong Chen, Ching Fa Cheng, Pei Chung Chen

    Abstract:

    Abstract Background The quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during Ambulance Transportation is suboptimal, and therefore measures that can improve the quality are desirable. Purpose To evaluate whether the use of a stabilization device can improve the quality of CPR during Ambulance Transportation. Methods This randomized controlled crossover trial enrolled 22 experienced Ambulance officers. Each participant performed CPR in an Ambulance under three conditions with 72h apart, each condition for 10min: non-moving (NM), moving without device (MND), and moving with device (MD). The sequences of conditions were randomized. The primary outcomes were effective chest compressions recorded by the Laerdal Resusci-Anne Skill-reporter manikin. The secondary outcomes included the severity of back pain scored using the Brief Pain Inventory short-form, the physiology parameter before and after CPR, and the changes in postural stability which was represented by the sway index (SI) of lower back measured using a goniometer. Results The overall effective compressions in 10min were 87.0±17% for NM, 59.0±19% for MND, and 69.0±23% for MD ( p vs. 0.29, p Conclusions The use of a stabilization device can improve the quality of CPR and posture stability during Ambulance Transportation, although the effects on the severity of back pain were not significant.