Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.5603/CJ.a2020.0068 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.5603/CJ.a2020.0068 32419128!8078983!32419128     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 235.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 235.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 235.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 235.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 235.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 269.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 269.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 269.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 269.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 269.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 302.79999999999995 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 302.79999999999995 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Cardiol+J 2020 ; 27 (5): 497-506 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=32419128|t=2020. Resuscitation of the patient with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 when wearing personal protective equipment: A randomized multicenter crossover simulation trial |pdf=|usr=}}{{32419128}} gab.com Text Resuscitation of the patient with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 when wearing personal protective equipment: A randomized multicenter crossover simulation trial JO: Cardiol J http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32419128 #FOAvip BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to evaluate various methods of chest compressions in patients with suspected/confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection conducted by medical students wearing full personal protective equipment (PPE) for aerosol generating procedures (AGP). METHODS: This was prospective, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, crossover simulation trial. Thirty-five medical students after an advanced cardiovascular life support course, which included performing 2-min continuous chest compression scenarios using three methods: (A) manual chest compression (CC), (B) compression with CPRMeter, (C) compression with LifeLine ARM device. During resuscitation they are wearing full personal protective equipment for aerosol generating procedures. RESULTS: The median chest compression depth using manual CC, CPRMeter and LifeLine ARM varied and amounted to 40 (38-45) vs. 45 (40-50) vs. 51 (50-52) mm, respectively (p = 0.002). The median chest compression rate was 109 (IQR; 102-131) compressions per minute (CPM) for manual CC, 107 (105-127) CPM for CPRMeter, and 102 (101-102) CPM for LifeLine ARM (p = 0.027). The percentage of correct chest recoil was the highest for LifeLine ARM - 100% (95-100), 80% (60-90) in CPRMeter group, and the lowest for manual CC - 29% (26-48). CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of this simulation trial, automated chest compression devices (ACCD) should be used for chest compression of patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19. In the absence of ACCD, it seems reasonable to change the cardiopulmonary resuscitation algorithm (in the context of patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19) by reducing the duration of the cardiopulmonary resuscitation cycle from the current 2-min to 1-min cycles due to a statistically significant reduction in the quality of chest compressions among rescuers wearing PPE AGP. Twit Text FOAVip Resuscitation of the patient with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 when wearing personal protective equipment: A randomized multicenter crossover simulation trial ????Cardiol J http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32419128 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=32419128 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|32419128}}</ref> Resuscitation of the patient with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 when wearing personal protective equipment: A randomized multicenter crossover simulation trial #MMPMID32419128 Malysz M; Dabrowski M; Bottiger BW; Smereka J; Kulak K; Szarpak A; Jaguszewski M; Filipiak KJ; Ladny JR; Ruetzler K; Szarpak L Cardiol J 2020[]; 27 (5): 497-506 PMID32419128show ga BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to evaluate various methods of chest compressions in patients with suspected/confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection conducted by medical students wearing full personal protective equipment (PPE) for aerosol generating procedures (AGP). METHODS: This was prospective, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, crossover simulation trial. Thirty-five medical students after an advanced cardiovascular life support course, which included performing 2-min continuous chest compression scenarios using three methods: (A) manual chest compression (CC), (B) compression with CPRMeter, (C) compression with LifeLine ARM device. During resuscitation they are wearing full personal protective equipment for aerosol generating procedures. RESULTS: The median chest compression depth using manual CC, CPRMeter and LifeLine ARM varied and amounted to 40 (38-45) vs. 45 (40-50) vs. 51 (50-52) mm, respectively (p = 0.002). The median chest compression rate was 109 (IQR; 102-131) compressions per minute (CPM) for manual CC, 107 (105-127) CPM for CPRMeter, and 102 (101-102) CPM for LifeLine ARM (p = 0.027). The percentage of correct chest recoil was the highest for LifeLine ARM - 100% (95-100), 80% (60-90) in CPRMeter group, and the lowest for manual CC - 29% (26-48). CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of this simulation trial, automated chest compression devices (ACCD) should be used for chest compression of patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19. In the absence of ACCD, it seems reasonable to change the cardiopulmonary resuscitation algorithm (in the context of patients with suspected/confirmed COVID-19) by reducing the duration of the cardiopulmonary resuscitation cycle from the current 2-min to 1-min cycles due to a statistically significant reduction in the quality of chest compressions among rescuers wearing PPE AGP. |*Betacoronavirus[MESH] |*Personal Protective Equipment[MESH] |Adult[MESH] |Aerosols[MESH] |COVID-19[MESH] |Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/*instrumentation/methods[MESH] |Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis/*prevention & control/transmission[MESH] |Cross-Over Studies[MESH] |Female[MESH] |Humans[MESH] |Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/*prevention & control[MESH] |Male[MESH] |Pandemics/*prevention & control[MESH] |Patient Simulation[MESH] |Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis/*prevention & control/transmission[MESH] |SARS-CoV-2[MESH]Resuscitation of the patient with suspected/confirmed COVID-19 when we(epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing