Real-time breath recognition by movies from a small drone landing on victim's bodies.

In local and global disaster scenes, rapid recognition of victims' breathing is vital. It is unclear whether the footage transmitted from small drones can enable medical providers to detect breathing. This study investigated the ability of small drones to evaluate breathing correctly after landing on victims' bodies and hovering over them. We enrolled 46 medical workers in this prospective, randomized, crossover study. The participants were provided with envelopes, from which they were asked to pull four notes sequentially and follow the written instructions ("breathing" and "no breathing"). After they lied on the ground in the supine position, a drone was landed on their abdomen, subsequently hovering over them. Two evaluators were asked to determine whether the participant had followed the "breathing" or "no breathing" instruction based on the real-time footage transmitted from the drone camera. The same experiment was performed while the participant was in the prone position. If both evaluators were able to determine the participant's breathing status correctly, the results were tagged as "correct." All experiments were successfully performed. Breathing was correctly determined in all 46 participants (100%) when the drone was landed on the abdomen and in 19 participants when the drone hovered over them while they were in the supine position (p < 0.01). In the prone position, breathing was correctly determined in 44 participants when the drone was landed on the abdomen and in 10 participants when it was kept hovering over them (p < 0.01). Notably, breathing status was misinterpreted as "no breathing" in 8 out of 27 (29.6%) participants lying in the supine position and 13 out of 36 (36.1%) participants lying in the prone position when the drone was kept hovering over them. The landing points seemed wider laterally when the participants were in the supine position than when they were in the prone position. Breathing status was more reliably determined when a small drone was landed on an individual's body than when it hovered over them.

Comparison of Chest Compression Quality Using Wing Boards versus Walking Next to a Moving Stretcher: A Randomized Crossover Simulation Study.

BACKGROUND: When a rescuer walks alongside a stretcher and compresses the patient's chest, the rescuer produces low-quality chest compressions. We hypothesized that a stretcher equipped with wing boards allows for better chest compressions than the conventional method. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, crossover study, we enrolled 45 medical workers and students. They performed hands-on chest compressions to a mannequin on a moving stretcher, while either walking (the walk method) or riding on wings attached to the stretcher (the wing method). The depths of the chest compressions were recorded. The participants' vital signs were measured before and after the trials. RESULTS: The average compression depth during the wing method (5.40 ± 0.50 cm) was greater than during the walk method (4.85 ± 0.80 cm; p < 0.01). The average compression rates during the two minutes were 215 ± 8 and 217 ± 5 compressions in the walk and wing methods, respectively (p = ns). Changes in blood pressure (14 ± 11 vs. 22 ± 14 mmHg), heart rate (32 ± 13 vs. 58 ± 20 bpm), and modified Borg scale (4 (interquartile range: 2-4) vs. 6 (5-7)) were significantly lower in the wing method cohort compared to the walking cohort (p < 0.01). The rescuer's size and physique were positively correlated with the chest compression depth during the walk method; however, we found no significant correlation in the wing method. CONCLUSIONS: Chest compressions performed on the stretcher while moving using the wing method can produce high-quality chest compressions, especially for rescuers with a smaller size and physique.

Postprandial serum C-peptide value is the optimal index to identify patients with non-obese type 2 diabetes who require multiple daily insulin injection: Analysis of C-peptide values before and after short-term intensive insulin therapy.

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: Type 2 diabetes is a progressive disease characterized by a yearly decline in insulin secretion; however, no definitive evidence exists showing the relationship between decreased insulin secretion and the need for insulin treatment. To determine the optimal insulin secretory index for identifying patients with non-obese type 2 diabetes who require multiple daily insulin injection (MDI), we evaluated various serum C-peptide immunoreactivity (CPR) values. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We near-normalized blood glucose with intensive insulin therapy (IIT) over a 2-week period in 291 patients with non-obese type 2 diabetes, based on our treatment protocol. After improving hyperglycemia, we challenged with oral hypoglycemic agent (OHA), and according to the responsiveness to OHA, patients were classified into three therapy groups: OHA alone (n = 103), basal insulin plus OHA (basal insulin-supported oral therapy [BOT]; n = 56) and MDI (n = 132). Glucagon-loading CPR increment (ΔCPR), fasting CPR (FCPR), CPR 2 h after breakfast (CPR2h), the ratio of FCPR to FPG (CPI), CPI 2 h after breakfast (CPI2h) and secretory unit of islets in transplantation (SUIT) were submitted for the analyses. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and multiple logistic analyses for these CPR indices were carried out. RESULTS: Many CPR values were significantly lower in the MDI group compared with the OHA alone or BOT groups. ROC and multiple logistic analyses disclosed that post-prandial CPR indices (CPR2h and CPI2h) were the most reliable CPR markers to identify patients requiring MDI. CONCLUSIONS: Postprandial CPR level after breakfast is the most useful index for identifying patients with non-obese type 2 diabetes who require MDI therapy.