fTitle: Mechanical vs. Manual Chest Compressions
題目：機械與人工胸外按壓
Author 作者: Semhar Tewelde

A recent meta–analysis of 12 studies (6,538 patients with 1,824 ROSC) assessed the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) using either manual vs. mechanical (load-distributing or piston-driven) compressions in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
最近的一項薈萃??分析報告對12項用人工和機械（負荷均勻按壓帶或驅動活塞）按壓心肺復蘇（CPR）的院外心臟驟停研究（6,538例1,824 ROSC）進行了質量評估 。
Compared w/manual CPR, load-distributing band CPR had significantly greater odds of ROSC (odds ratio, 1.62 and p<0.001)
與手動CPR心肺復蘇相比，負荷均勻按壓帶可明顯提高ROSC（比值比為1.62，P <0.001）
The treatment effect for piston-driven CPR was similar to manual CPR
活塞驅動CPR的治療效果與人工心肺復蘇類似
The difference in percentages of ROSC rates from CPR was 8.3% for load-distributing band CPR and 5.2% for piston-driven CPR
負荷均勻按壓帶CPR心肺復蘇ROSC率的差異百分比為8.3％，而活塞驅動CPR 為5.2％
Compared with manual CPR, combining both mechanical CPR devices produced a significant treatment effect in favor of higher odds of ROSC with mechanical CPR devices (odds ratio, 1.53 and p<0.001)
與人工心肺復蘇相比，這兩個機械心肺復蘇儀的應用產生了顯著的增加ROSC的治療效果（比值比為1.53，P<0.001）

References 參考文獻：
Westfall M, Krantz S, Mullin C, Kaufman C. Mechanical versus manual chest compressions in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Crit Care Med 2013 Jul; 41(7):1782-9