Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 15, 2025

Standardized Model of Ventricular Fibrillation and Advanced Cardiac Life Support in Swine
Published on: January 30, 2020
Effect of a Real-Time Audio Ventilation Feedback Device on the Survival Rate and Outcomes of Patients with
Eun Dong Lee1, Yun Deok Jang1, Ji Hun Kang1
1Department of Emergency Medicine, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, 75, Bokji-ro, Busanjin-gu, Busan 47392, Republic of Korea.
Abstract:
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of real-time audio ventilation feedback on the survival of patients with an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) during advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) performed by paramedics. This research was a prospective randomized controlled study performed in Busan, South Korea, from July 2022 to December 2022. This study included 121 patients, ages 19 and up, who were transferred to the study site, excluding 91 patients who did not receive CPR under a doctor's direction as well as those who had a '(DNR)' order among 212 adult CA patients. OHCA patients' clinical prognosis was compared by being randomly assigned to either a general manual defibrillator (NVF) group (N = 58) or a manual defibrillator with an audio ventilation feedback (AVF) group (N = 63). To verify the primary outcome, the cerebral performance category (CPC), return of spontaneous consciousness (ROSC), 30h survival, and survival discharge were compared. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to analyze the association between the audio-feedback manual defibrillator (AVF) and the ROSC of OHCA patients. This study analyzed 121 patients among 212 OHCA patients. The ROSC (AVF group: 32 {26.4%} vs. NVF group: 21 {17.3%}), 24 h survival (AVF group: 24 {19.8%} vs. NVF group: 11 {9.0%}), and survival discharge (AVF group: 12 {9.9%} vs. NVF group: 6 {4.9%}) were higher in the AVF group than the NVF group. However, upon analyzing CPC scores in the surviving patients between the two groups, there was no significant difference (AVF group: 4.1 ± 1.23 vs. NVF group:4.7 ± 1.23, p = 1.232). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the use of AVF was associated with a higher ROSC (odds ratio {OR}, 0.46; 95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.23-0.73; p < 0.01) and higher survival at 30 h (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41-0.98; p = 0.01).
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation II: ACLS Airway Management
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation III: AED Use
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation I: Adult
Assessment of Ventilation I: Respiratory Rate
A Ventilation assessment is critical for monitoring a patient's health status. Respiration, one of the most accessible vital signs, provides insights into the function of numerous body systems and can indicate serious health issues, such as brainstem injuries from head trauma.
Critical Guidelines for Assessing Ventilation:
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation IV: Pharmacological Management
Mechanical Ventilation III: Noninvasive Ventilation
Noninvasive Positive-Pressure Ventilation...

