J Korean Soc Emerg Med.
2023 Dec;34(6):467-486.
The research for the utilization of mechanical chest compression device for emergency medical center in Korea: a survey-based study
- Affiliations
-
- 1Department of Emergency Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea
- 2Department of Emergency Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- 3Nursing Department, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea
Abstract
Objective
During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the use of mechanical chest compression (meCC) devices for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in emergency departments might have increased. However, there are few reports yet of such an increase in use. This study aimed to assess the current status of meCC device utilization in emergency medical institutions nationwide through a survey.
Methods
This cross-sectional study conducted a survey from August 20, 2022 to September 29, 2022, using emails and text messages to target 287 out of a total of 409 emergency medical institutions nationwide for which contact information was obtained.
Results
Of the 287 emergency medical institutions, 127 responded (44.2% response rate). Of these, 74 (58.3%) reported using meCC devices. The utilization rates were highest in the regional emergency medical center, followed by local emergency medical centers and local emergency medical agencies (93.3% vs. 67.3% vs. 27.1%, respectively; P<0.001). The most common reason for device purchases was to reduce rescuer fatigue and ensure high-quality CPR. The second reason was personnel shortages, while the regional emergency medical center gave a higher priority to the protection of medical staff from COVID-19. The meCC device group reported significantly higher cases of CPR (100 or more cases per year) compared to the non-meCC device group (64.9% vs. 24.6%; P<0.001) although no difference was shown in the total number of medical staff participated in CPR between the groups. Also, 90.5% of the meCC group expressed satisfaction with using the device.
Conclusion
More than 50% of emergency medical institutions used meCC devices in CPR, citing reasons such as reducing rescuer fatigue and ensuring high-quality CPR.