digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

CPR no longer needed?

news.com.au — Saving lives is set to become a hands-free activity due to a new gadget that automatically performs CPR on patients. The portable machine, named AutoPulse by manufacturer Zoll, consists of a band that wraps around the chest of a patient and can be programmed to squeeze as frequently as an emergency worker would pump with their hands.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • DermDoc, on 02/24/2008, -4/+16Soon, you won't need me at all ....
    • TheImmigrant, on 02/24/2008, -0/+12Im a Medic, and this has been around for yrs in the US. its just really expensive, so they don't want to use it. (up wards of $5000). It also doesn't provide breaths.
      • punchingjudy, on 02/24/2008, -7/+1Yes it does. Read the article.
        • openbah, on 02/24/2008, -0/+5Umm, no it doesn't. This machine does NOT provide breaths, only compressions.
        • TX972, on 02/24/2008, -0/+3"Those USING [my caps] the machine are able to administer just two breaths for every 30 chest compressions carried out by the device, freeing them up to perform other tasks." I.e., read the article!!
      • senatorpjt, on 02/24/2008, -1/+1I've read that the breaths are much more important than the compressions. (Or was it the other way around?) I don't remember. In any case, I read some article saying that one of them was not nearly as important as the other, and even that it's better to give more of one and less of the other. Don't take this as any sort of medical advice since I can't even remember where I saw it...
        • senatorpjt, on 02/24/2008, -0/+2http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/16/health/w ...
          "Now, for adults who suddenly collapse, there's powerful evidence that chest compression alone is far better than doing nothing. In fact, the new evidence suggests that by interrupting lifesaving chest compressions, mouth-to-mouth resuscitation may do more harm than good."

          So, the compressions were more important than the breaths.

          Another interesting thing, the article says that many bystanders won't give CPR because of the mouth-to-mouth stuff. I always thought that in a joking way but I never thought it would actually happen.
      • ahoyhoy, on 02/24/2008, -3/+1I'm wondering why you would choose this device over a defibrillator. In all seriousness, it seems much more effective.
        • bejayel, on 02/24/2008, -1/+1aren't defibrillators for an irregular heart beat, not a stopped one?
        • kodek, on 02/24/2008, -0/+2... you don't.
          You do CPR until a defibrillator is available. This machine would do CPR on the person because after a while, one can become tired of doing the compressions.
    • openbah, on 02/24/2008, -1/+10Did I read the wrong article? I don't remember reading anything about dermatology...
    • Magnus150, on 02/25/2008, -0/+2You can take CPR training everywhere - to the artic, on a plane, in the plains, on the highway, in the middle of a mall. These machines, while handy, do NOT replace adequate CPR training.
  • IvanB, on 02/24/2008, -1/+24It has to be Lupus anyway.
  • james45932, on 02/24/2008, -2/+49The main problem that i see with this device is that most people will think that they will no longer need to be trained in how to do CPR. what happens the first time someone goes down and no one around knows how to perform CPR without this machine, the person will probably die. Yes it could be a good life saving tool, just like a AED. But having the knowledge of how to do CPR properly is a wonderful thing and should never be underestimated.
    • Xavious85, on 02/24/2008, -2/+15I agree 100%
      • MOJIRA, on 05/17/2008, -2/+2Congrats; maybe you should just digg him up?
    • worthone, on 02/24/2008, -1/+1You can't stress enough the importance of the word never.
    • mattes5, on 02/24/2008, -0/+2it was design more for ERs, hospitals, and EMS. I don't think they will be retailing it for civilian use. Maybe eventually like they are doing with the AEDs but I don't forsee it anytime soon. My ambulance service doesn't even carry them.

      but notice in the article "Australian Advanced Life Support Committee chairman Tony Padley said the hands-free nature of the machine was a huge advantage for health workers."
    • expatcatalyst, on 02/24/2008, -0/+3I agree. In the AF something similar happened in the world of navigation when the B-1 came out. Since the navigation computer was so sophisticated, there was a fear that navigators wouldn't retain the basic skills to navigate the aircraft when the inevitable happened and the computer needed a re-boot. Having no one with the basic skills needed is not very fun when you are either hurtling through the air at 600 knots or laying on the floor suffering a heart attack.
    • macaddct1984, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1It would also be useless on infants, where the compression method is entirely different. Also, if the depth of compressions wasn't adjustable, it would be worthless on pediatrics and large patients.
    • warriorscot, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1I always find CPR training so confusing, Ive been trained and qualified in it but in the years since I've done it the ratio to breaths to compressions that is taught and used have changed at least half a dozen times.
  • TheShom, on 02/24/2008, -2/+17Hmm, i wonder what this thing would do if it ever malfunctioned while performing cpr?

    CPR by humans FTW...
    • Bigheadaus, on 02/24/2008, -0/+2Although I prefer having defibrillators around. 5% success rate for CPR alone. Goes up to 70% with a defibrillator on hand. Then again you only have 10 minutes, which is why knowing CPR is so much more important.

      I have to admit, the new CPR that has been brought in here in Australia is quite hard work. Hopefully volunteers of first aid will get these machines sooner rather than later. I can only imagine what the day will be like if I ever have to perform it.
    • carpespasm, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1Well, about 30% of cardiac arrest victims that get CPR wind up with broken ribs, this device would do the same as CPR normally, I dunno.
      • Magnus150, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3I'd say being alive with broken ribs beats the ***** out of dead and intact ribs. But thats just me...
      • Metasquares, on 02/25/2008, -0/+3If you're in a state of cardiac arrest, broken ribs are the least of your problems.
    • macaddct1984, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1That's the same reason why people in EMS don't use electronic blood pressure devices.
    • TX972, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1Ordinary people often malfunction while performing CPR too. After all, who gets to practice once a week? once a month? once a year? The AutoPulse is going to be more consistently right than humans and can go on endlessly if needed.

      These days the AutoPulse is far too expensive to go into every home, let alone every school, athletic facility, church, airport, etc. Furthermore, it takes professional training to be able to use the device properly. An untrained civilian is likely to do more damage than good to the victim if he tries to use the device without proper supervision.

      For what it's worth, most people who have heart attacks do not suffer cardiac arrests. For them, the best help is to call 911 IMMEDIATELY and to take an aspirin.
    • iankino, on 02/24/2008, -0/+2I can just picture this thing malfunctioning and squeezing someone like an Anaconda.
    • aaabatteries, on 02/24/2008, -1/+1mouth to mouth.
  • H2Glitch2007, on 02/24/2008, -2/+25LIke you would really carry it around with you everywhere.
    • punchingjudy, on 02/24/2008, -0/+3On the truck with our other equipment. It's not meant for the layperson.
  • VeerTheTIGuy, on 02/24/2008, -2/+1needs video
  • mattes5, on 02/24/2008, -1/+21I am a paramedic. We don't have these at my service as of yet. But I have seen them at conventions. I think they are a great innovation It allows medics to push drugs and ventilate without having to worry about compressions which is alot of stuff to deal with if you are in the back of an ambulance alone with the patient. Also it ensures better compression efficiency.
    • wolfboy2883, on 02/24/2008, -3/+2That's why you've got EMT-basics and engine crews to dump the menial stuff like compressions on :)

      It will probably make its way onto medic units as a "just in case" like the oxylator, but I don't see this device being deployed regularly. If its malfunction rate is anything like the oxylator, it'll end up on the shelf in no time.
      • mattes5, on 02/24/2008, -0/+3Well when you work in an urban area its hardly ever a problem. But when you work in a rural area with 10 min transport times and almost no help its great to have.
  • thesilvershadow, on 02/24/2008, -0/+23I'd say the title is a bit misleading though - these machines don't mean CPR is no longer needed, they are just able to perform one component of CPR (chest compressions) and therefore free someone up to do something else. Also, machines like this have been around for a while now, so I'd hardly describe it as a new gadget:

    http://www.jolife.se/site.php?sid=c&ref=45&cat=45& ...

    Seeing them in action is quite disturbing, they can be very forceful and break ribs a lot more commonly than with standard chest compressions. The major advantage is that unlike people they do not get fatigued so the compressions they provide are good quality throughout. Also, (at least of the LUCAS machine I've seen in action) they can expand the chest as well as compress it thanks to the suction cup attachment, which improves cardiac output.
    • Archer007, on 02/24/2008, -1/+1That is informative but creepy.
    • slevit1, on 02/24/2008, -0/+4As a paramedic and CPR instructor, I have seen these in action and done CPR on more people than I can remember. While they can look a little rough since you're just watching a little mechanical arm thump on someone's chest, they are no rougher than a human. They don't teach you this in CPR class, but if you are doing CPR effectively, you will break multiple ribs just about every time you do it.
      Think about it...the ribs are fairly inflexible bones which [almost all] attach directly to the sternum. When you push the sternum down 2-3 inches in CPR, it only makes sense that many of the ribs would break. However, if you're doing CPR on someone, breaking ribs is the least of their worries.
  • funkyflea, on 02/24/2008, -0/+13What happens when it becomes self aware?
    • carpespasm, on 02/24/2008, -0/+3it has high self-esteem knowing that it's purpose in life is to save lives.
    • punchingjudy, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1It'll save Sarah Connor.
    • mellowcool, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1All AutoPulse machines around the world will chase people to death!
      • mellowcool, on 02/24/2008, -0/+2Revive the person and kill them again! lol!
  • Ryan0617, on 02/24/2008, -0/+10To be honest, i think machines are good an all(i.e personal computers etc), but i actually hate the fact that one day computers would be doing alot of the things we do now, i like to keep some things hands on.
    • anagoge, on 02/24/2008, -1/+1Sex
    • TX972, on 02/24/2008, -1/+1That day when computers do a lot of what humans used to do is here now. I can't even adjust the fuel-to-air ratio going to my auto's engine because it's all computer-controlled. If the computer sensor is faulty, it's $600 for a new chip. The auto mechanic who is not computer-savvy these days is unemployed. Next, let's consider your dishwasher's cycles, your clothes washer and dryer, even your toaster. Have you microchipped your pet yet? Been to the doctor or the hospital lately? Still have an analog television? The day you are dreadfully anticipating is here today.
  • slevit1, on 02/24/2008, -0/+6I am a paramedic as well and fire stations in my area have been testing this device. It is not a new idea at all and will definitely not negate the need for human CPR. First, another device, known as the thumper, has been around on the ambulances for at least 9 years (as long as I've been riding). It does exactly the same thing as this device, but is a lot bulkier and a bit harder to set up. Actually, the old thumpers even had the ability to ventilate for you. Second, the device, while more compact than the thumper, is still pretty large and expensive; you're not going to be carrying it around with you.
    Most importantly, you still need to know how to do CPR in order to know how to position this device, when to use it, and how to provide the rescue breathing. Also, you will need to know how to do full CPR before this device arrives at the scene, while it is being set up, and in other situations when it is not available. These devices can be very useful on the ambulance or in the ER as they free up a person to ventilate, push drugs, or perform other tasks. But, they will certainly never make human CPR unnecessary.
    • punchingjudy, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1Ah didn't even see your comment. :) Old thumpers > new thumpers, in my humble opinion.
  • Mattman723, on 02/24/2008, -8/+1I'm taking a CPR class in 44 minutes... Wish they figured this out yesterday :)
  • ShyGuy91284, on 02/24/2008, -0/+6:-( Then how are young teens of future generations going to trick that hot life guard at the pool to be mouth-to-mouth with them?
  • cuttyhunk, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1I am an EMT-Basic and have seen these in action, it is kinda scary to watch! But these have been around for a few years, its nothing new.
  • punchingjudy, on 02/24/2008, -0/+3I'm a paramedic for a large city 911 service. Automated CPR machines have been around for MANY years now in various incarnations. Our service uses the Thumper, which has a hydraulically based arm that extends over the patient. The fact that it's an adjustable arm and not something that wraps entirely around the patient makes it extremely versatile, particularly with our ever widening population.
    By no means does this replace CPR. It takes much more time to set the damn thing up than it does to just start manual chest compressions on your own. And when you're 3 minutes from the hospital, it's much easier to just do it on your own.
    My experience with other Zoll products hasn't been too fabulous. I'm a bigger fan of Philips.
    This article was just one giant puff piece.
  • chubbybubba, on 02/24/2008, -2/+5I too am in emergency medicine. CPR does not save lives! It can delay death but the heart needs to be kick started. Epinephrine injection is needed to push a rhythm out of asystole (flat line of death), and a shock is needed to push a rhythm out of a vent tach (rhythm just before flatlining.) Forget trying to strap an auto-chest compressor on! An auto defibrillator should be the priority!
    Step #1 -always Call for help.
    • punchingjudy, on 02/24/2008, -0/+4Are you kidding? CPR is the biggest step, otherwise they wouldn't EMPHASIZE 2 minutes of CPR prior to epi admin in a Vfib patient. Those are the patients you get back, not asystoles. If they're that far, they're 99.9% screwed.
      • BikeRanger, on 03/29/2008, -0/+1Try vasopressin, it'll resuscitate a rock.
    • slevit1, on 02/24/2008, -0/+2Umm...you may be in emergency medicine, but my guess is that you're not very good at it. CPR is a vitally important link in the chain of survival and absolutely does save lives. Have you never run a code? If a patient is in asystole, chances are that they're already dead and epi isn't going to do anything to help. Moreover, how do you think that epi is going to circulate without CPR?! Please, nobody listen to this guy.
    • MasterThief117, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1I teach BLS. BLS is THE most important step in keeping someone alive. The next step is ACLS, where you get the drugs, which keeps them stable.
      And epinephrine is not the only thing to "kick start the heart." You have AED's and other defibrillators, which stop the heart, and the manual pumping from chest compressions is what then resets the hearts rhythm.
    • sharp357, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1I'm on chubbybubba's side on this one. Most of you need to read carefully. He states clearly "CPR does not save lives! It can delay death". While important, by itself it will not save lives. CPR all you want away from help and you'll feel great and know you tried. But it won't bring them back. After 30years as a medic I question epi as a real treatment though. I've given enough epi to make a steak walk and its mostly useless.
      As to the machine, others have done this before. The problem is that conventional CPR is ineffective. Right now a study is ongoing using the "ResQPOD and ResQPump". These are proving to be unbelievably effective. By the end of the study I may be eating my words about CPR not saving lives. But at this point it does not. If you have more than my 30 years experience then feel free to educate me with some solid evidence.
    • warriorscot, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1Don't know about the rest but auto-defibrillators are around at least what I got told was one when i did my CPR training, you just stick the pads on the chest like it says on the box and press Go and begin CPR it will then give you an audible warning before activation and tell you when to resume CPR. They are apparently used by GPs(they are small) and in remote locations were it isn't practical to have some trained in the use of a defibrillator.
  • senatorpjt, on 02/24/2008, -1/+1You'd be better off just carrying around the bulb to do the breaths. You're probably much more likely to get CPR if nobody has to put their mouth on you.
  • mxxx, on 02/24/2008, -0/+3I've just got home from doing an AED course. They're wonderful things, but they take time to set up. Granted, only a few seconds if you know what you're doing but adding more equipment that needs to be set up just adds time when you could be defibrilating. I worry about the time it's going to take for people to stop panicking and get help, set this up, set up an AED and adminster the shocks. Your patient could be asystolic by the time you get round to actually doing anything. Time will tell though.
  • copypasterepeat, on 02/24/2008, -0/+3Everyone needs a bit of CPR in their lives [/horrible self-promotion]
  • CaviMike, on 02/24/2008, -0/+3CPR no longer needed?! Yeah, sure. Buried.
  • MasterThief117, on 02/24/2008, -1/+1I saw a demo of these at Walter Reed when they were trying to sell it to us about a year and a half ago. We turned them down as they are too expensive per unit, and there is just no point to having them as we already have enough people trained in BLS. This also is another thing in our hospital that can break or fail when needed most, and another thing that we need to fetch when someone is in trouble. A person does not fail when needed most, and if they do, we get the person next to them.

    In short, this thing is not worth it.
    • MasterThief117, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1I forgot to add that these things are also powerful devices and have a lot more potential to break ribs than their human counterpart.
  • henrywfstone, on 02/24/2008, -0/+0(i literally just got home from one of many rescue emergency care courses I've done, which is basically very advanced first aid)

    my comment was too long... summary : CPR keeps them ticking until the defibrillator gets there. if you have both then use the defrib. this new machine is pointless!

    comment..
    realistically if someone goes into full cardiac arrest and their heart is fribulating (contracting randomly and in the wrong order) you NEED a de-fribulator to knock it back into its natural beat. CPR very rarely actually starts the sufferers heart pumping regularly again unless they have just started fribulating. CPR just keeps them alive until the de-frib gets there.

    from a practical point of view this seems fairly impractical as it doesn't sound portable. it sounds like the sort of thing that would be kept at a sports center or place where cardiac arrests are common. but these places all have de-fribs nowdays. so if i was the medic on hand and there was a cardiac arrest i would get the de-frib because that's what they're going to need!

    the only thing that this new machine will do (if it works) will keep the person administering CPR less tired, so they can do it for longer. as long as you are properly trained + strong and big enough to perform CPR this isn't too much of a problem.
  • ubuntu710, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1titles is miss leading, cool but not everyone caries around this gaget, so manual CPR FTW
  • aaabatteries, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1kawaii!
  • nakedjuice, on 02/24/2008, -0/+0but does it run on lithium ion batteries?
  • burley25, on 02/24/2008, -0/+1this was a truimp, im making a note here, huge success!
  • copperp, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1I just saw this used in the hospital to try and resuscitate a patient. Towards the end they decided to take it off because the doctor didn't like how it was working. Later, we saw the nurse in the hall and she said after the code was ran, they discussed it and decided they wouldn't be using the machine again. I think one problem was that it needs to be stopped quickly and only momentarily every now and then for someone to take a manual pulse and see if the heart's beating or not (never completely trust the monitor). Maybe the machine isn't convenient enough in that respect. I really don't see the benefit of this especially if you're following protocol and switching who's administering the chest compressions every couple minutes (I forget the exact number).
  • Gabberwok, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Life isn't like the movies. The vast majority of the people who receive CPR don't make it. Making sure everyone has quick access to AED's is much more important.
  • justpaddling, on 02/25/2008, -0/+0It is still a machine and may not be available when and where the victim is in need. I think it may be of use in specific areas, whereas having the knowledge and training to perform CPR by people may be more practical.
  • jabraham9, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Hi All,

    I work for ZOLL Australia and would like to clear up a few comments mentioned in this forum. The AutoPulse is new to Australia, and this piece is Australian news. I agree that this device is used in Europe and the US.
    There have been comments about the device being similar to the thumper or LUCAS. The only thing that these devices have in common is that they provide CPR. The AutoPulse uses load distributing band compressions and are semi circumferential, rather than piston driven systems like the LUCAS and thumper. The up shot of this is that AutoPulse allows you to apply more work to the chest WITHOUT breaking ribs as the force is distributed.
    The other thing is that the device is used as an ADJUNCT to CPR. It will not and cannot replace it. It is designed to free up a person and provide better quality and more consistent compressions than manual CPR.

    If you have questions, please reply. I do not want to turn this forum into a sales pitch, so I am happy to take questions off line.
    • Haidoken, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1I just got my CPR/First Aid/AED certification. What I want to know is if this is going to supplant chest compression. The breaths will still need to be given, but since this machine pumps blood better than chest compression, will it replace or be used in conjunction with the chest compressions?
      • jabraham9, on 02/25/2008, -0/+0The AutoPulse still does chest compressions, but rather than pushing down on the sternum, it squeezes around the whole chest area to deliver them. Rescue breaths still need to be delivered and in default mode, the unit pauses for 2 breaths every 30 seconds. You can change the operation mode to continuous if the patient is tubed.
    • TX972, on 02/25/2008, -0/+1Thank you for your comment, jabraham9. I have watched the AutoPulse in the US. It is truly an impressive device. It is obvious, however, that it does not belong in the home first-aid kit. Its use needs to be under the control of trained EMS responders who will decide when use is appropriate and when it is not. More importantly, conventional CPR should never be delayed in anticipation that an AutoPulse device will be available. When a person goes into cardiac arrest, call 911 immediately and begin CPR.

      Can you tell me whether Zoll's 12-lead ECG monitors in Australia are equipped with software for ACI/TIPI evaluation and TPI predictive printouts? (I would have given you a private shout about this, but your profile does not allow that.)
      • jabraham9, on 02/25/2008, -0/+0Agreed with you on not belonging in the home first aid kit. Training on how to use the AutoPulse really does dictate how successful you will be in application. I completely agree with you. Good quality, manual CPR is absolutely vital and it improves outcomes even if an AutoPulse is coming to take over.
        Re ACI, I will find out for you...
  • Vet4Peace, on 02/25/2008, -1/+1The proper name for this device is the "Geezer Squeezer." And boy, they will squeeze the ever-loving crap outta your patient. LOL.
  • katotmt25, on 02/26/2008, -0/+0Interesting concept, but what if the machine fails? Humans still need to be able to perform the CPR.
  • dudley9, on 05/25/2008, -1/+0http://www.genericsmed.com/
    http://www.generics.ws/
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.