| 1. |
- Levy, Michael, et al.
(författare)
-
Metrics of mechanical chest compression device use in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American college of emergency physicians open. - : Wiley. - 2688-1152. ; 1:6, s. 1214-1221
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- ObjectiveThe quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) affects outcomes from cardiac arrest, yet manual CPR is difficult to administer. Although mechanical CPR (mCPR) devices offer high quality CPR, only limited data describe their deployment, their interaction with standard manual CPR (sCPR), and the consequent effects on chest compression continuity and patient outcomes. We sought to describe the interaction between sCPR and mCPR and the impact of the sCPR‐mCPR transition upon outcomes in adult out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).MethodsWe analyzed all adult ventricular fibrillation OHCA treated by the Anchorage Fire Department (AFD) during calendar year 2016. AFD protocols include the immediate initiation of sCPR upon rescuer arrival and transition to mCPR, guided by patient status. We compared CPR timing, performance, and outcomes between those receiving sCPR only and those receiving sCPR transitioning to mCPR (sCPR + mCPR).ResultsAll 19 sCPR‐only patients achieved return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after a median of 3.3 (interquartile range 2.2–5.1) minutes. Among 30 patients remaining pulseless after sCPR (median 6.9 [5.3–11.0] minutes), transition to mCPR occurred with a median chest compression interruption of 7 (5–13) seconds. Twenty‐one of 30 sCPR + mCPR patients achieved ROSC after a median of 11.2 (5.7–23.8) additional minutes of mCPR. Survival differed between groups: sCPR only 14/19 (74%) versus sCPR + mCPR 13/30 (43%), P = 0.045. ConclusionIn this series, transition to mCPR occurred in patients unresponsive to initial sCPR with only brief interruptions in chest compressions. Assessment of mCPR must consider the interactions with sCPR.
|
|
| 2. |
- Petersson, Bodil, 1967-, et al.
(författare)
-
Experimental Heritage as Practice : Approaching the Past through the Present at the Intersection of Art and Archaeology
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Internet Archaeology. - York : University of York. - 1363-5387. ; :55, s. 1-84
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This text presents the emerging transdisciplinary practice of Experimental Heritage as performed within an ongoing Irish-Swedish research project involving artists and archaeologists. The project is situated simultaneously in western Ireland and south-eastern Sweden. It explores the chosen Irish and Swedish landscapes of Clare and Öland, their similarities and differences, with the aid of combined and integrated artistic and archaeological practices. The starting points for common explorations are: stone and water, movement and time/the multitemporal, and the tangible and intangible aspects of landscape experience. In a transdisciplinary process we explore new ways of combining art, archaeology and heritage within and between these landscapes.One path towards fulfilling the strivings is to explore art, archaeology and heritage through the senses. A phenomenological landscape perspective and an eco-cultural approach is combined with Performance Studies and movement-based practice. These perspectives and methodologies are paired with artistic and archaeological approaches to research such as those conducted through poetry, music, performance, visual arts, physical surveys, mapping and excavations.Methods of working have developed from walking in the landscape to sketching, through visuals, sound and movement, group dialogue, team building and exploring the materiality of making. Group movement-based workshops are used to support receptivity and inner listening for decision making through somatic principles and the senses. The project encourages transdisciplinary as well as translocal practice to arrive at new approaches and perspectives on how the past matters to us in the present and how it might have an impact on the future.To achieve true both transdisciplinary and translocal ways of working through art and archaeology/heritage, we need to expand beyond conventional art and archaeology/heritage research, communication and presentation within the well-known framework of universities, cultural history museums and art institutions. The constraints of these conventions are substituted by alternative settings in the landscape. This landscape-based practice includes method development across disciplines, times and geographic distances. It also includes collaborations with people from local communities that can contribute to the explorations with their perspectives, experiences and stories.The advantage of Experimental Heritage as practice in the landscape is its ability to challenge our current worldview to better understand other times and cultures as well as our own. This in turn provides us with new tools to create alternative futures resting on care and respect for the need for diversity and breaking with boundaries set up between nature and culture as well as hierarchies of central and peripheral. We intend to find out more about the multitemporal layers in the landscapes surrounding us and how they relate to our inner landscapes of multitemporal perception. The combination and equal roles of artists and archaeologists as well as the contributions of researchers, and members of the local communities in this work is crucial. Equality and diversity encourage transdisciplinary knowledge development.
|
|
