Fully automatic rhythm analysis during chest compression pauses.

AIM: Chest compression artefacts impede a reliable rhythm analysis during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). These artefacts are not present during ventilations in 30:2 CPR. The aim of this study is to prove that a fully automatic method for rhythm analysis during ventilation pauses in 30:2 CPR is reliable an accurate. METHODS: For this study 1414min of 30:2 CPR from 135 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest cases were analysed. The data contained 1942 pauses in compressions longer than 3.5s. An automatic pause detector identified the pauses using the transthoracic impedance, and a shock advice algorithm (SAA) diagnosed the rhythm during the detected pauses. The SAA analysed 3-s of the ECG during each pause for an accurate shock/no-shock decision. RESULTS: The sensitivity and PPV of the pause detector were 93.5% and 97.3%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the SAA in the detected pauses were 93.8% (90% low CI, 90.0%) and 95.9% (90% low CI, 94.7%), respectively. Using the method, shocks would have been advanced in 97% of occasions. For patients in nonshockable rhythms, rhythm reassessment pauses would be avoided in 95.2% (95% CI, 91.6-98.8) of occasions, thus increasing the overall chest compression fraction (CCF). CONCLUSION: An automatic method could be used to safely analyse the rhythm during ventilation pauses. This would contribute to an early detection of refibrillation, and to increase CCF in patients with nonshockable rhythms.

Feasibility of automated rhythm assessment in chest compression pauses during cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

AIM: To demonstrate the feasibility of doing a reliable rhythm analysis in the chest compression pauses (e.g. pauses for two ventilations) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). METHODS: We extracted 110 shockable and 466 nonshockable segments from 235 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest episodes. Pauses in chest compressions were already annotated in the episodes. We classified pauses as ventilation or non-ventilation pause using the transthoracic impedance. A high-temporal resolution shock advice algorithm (SAA) that gives a shock/no-shock decision in 3s was launched once for every pause longer than 3s. The sensitivity and specificity of the SAA for the analyses during the pauses were computed. RESULTS: We identified 4476 pauses, 3263 were ventilation pauses and 2183 had two ventilations. The median of the mean duration per segment of all pauses and of pauses with two ventilations were 6.1s (4.9-7.5s) and 5.1s (4.2-6.4s), respectively. A total of 91.8% of the pauses and 95.3% of the pauses with two ventilations were long enough to launch the SAA. The overall sensitivity and specificity were 95.8% (90% low one-sided CI, 94.3%) and 96.8% (CI, 96.2%), respectively. There were no significant differences between the sensitivities (P=0.84) and the specificities (P=0.18) for the ventilation and the non-ventilation pauses. CONCLUSION: Chest compression pauses are frequent and of sufficient duration to launch a high-temporal resolution SAA. During these pauses rhythm analysis was reliable. Pre-shock pauses could be minimised by analysing the rhythm during ventilation pauses when CPR is delivered at 30:2 compression:ventilation ratio.