AI Article Synopsis
- A review was conducted to compare continuous flow insufflation of oxygen (CFIO) with standard ventilation methods for adults who experienced an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).
- Four key studies were identified from databases like Medline and Embase that provided the most relevant evidence for this comparison.
- The conclusion drawn from the review is that CFIO does not lead to better survival rates or spontaneous circulation returns than traditional ventilation strategies in patients with OHCA.
Article Abstract
A short cut review was carried out to establish whether continuous flow insufflation of oxygen (CFIO) is better than standard ventilation strategies at improving outcome in adults who have suffered an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Papers were found in Medline and Embase using the reported searches of which four presented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The author, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, results and study weaknesses of these best papers are tabulated. It is concluded that CFIO does not improve survival or return of spontaneous circulation compared with standard ventilation strategies in OHCA.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2017-207366.1 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!