BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

460 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32131894)

  • 1. Rescue under ongoing CPR from an upper floor: evaluation of three different evacuation routes and mechanical and manual chest compressions: a manikin trial.
    Drinhaus H; Nüsgen S; Adams N; Wetsch WA; Annecke T
    Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med; 2020 Mar; 28(1):16. PubMed ID: 32131894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Mechanical chest compressions and simultaneous defibrillation vs conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: the LINC randomized trial.
    Rubertsson S; Lindgren E; Smekal D; Östlund O; Silfverstolpe J; Lichtveld RA; Boomars R; Ahlstedt B; Skoog G; Kastberg R; Halliwell D; Box M; Herlitz J; Karlsten R
    JAMA; 2014 Jan; 311(1):53-61. PubMed ID: 24240611
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The Efficacy of LUCAS in Prehospital Cardiac Arrest Scenarios: A Crossover Mannequin Study.
    Gyory RA; Buchle SE; Rodgers D; Lubin JS
    West J Emerg Med; 2017 Apr; 18(3):437-445. PubMed ID: 28435494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Chest Compression Fraction between Mechanical Compressions on a Reducible Stretcher and Manual Compressions on a Standard Stretcher during Transport in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrests: The Ambulance Stretcher Innovation of Asian Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (ASIA-CPR) Pilot Trial.
    Kim TH; Shin SD; Song KJ; Hong KJ; Ro YS; Song SW; Kim CH
    Prehosp Emerg Care; 2017; 21(5):636-644. PubMed ID: 28467138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Incomplete chest wall decompression: a clinical evaluation of CPR performance by EMS personnel and assessment of alternative manual chest compression-decompression techniques.
    Aufderheide TP; Pirrallo RG; Yannopoulos D; Klein JP; von Briesen C; Sparks CW; Deja KA; Conrad CJ; Kitscha DJ; Provo TA; Lurie KG
    Resuscitation; 2005 Mar; 64(3):353-62. PubMed ID: 15733766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Mountain rescue cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a comparison between manual and mechanical chest compressions during manikin cardio resuscitation.
    Thomassen O; Skaiaa SC; Assmuss J; Østerås Ø; Heltne JK; Wik L; Brattebo G
    Emerg Med J; 2017 Sep; 34(9):573-577. PubMed ID: 28476730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. LUCAS compared to manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation is more effective during helicopter rescue-a prospective, randomized, cross-over manikin study.
    Putzer G; Braun P; Zimmermann A; Pedross F; Strapazzon G; Brugger H; Paal P
    Am J Emerg Med; 2013 Feb; 31(2):384-9. PubMed ID: 23000324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Mechanical versus manual chest compression CPR under ground ambulance transport conditions.
    Fox J; Fiechter R; Gerstl P; Url A; Wagner H; Lüscher TF; Eriksson U; Wyss CA
    Acute Card Care; 2013 Mar; 15(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 23425006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluation of a novel device that maintains the balance of a cardiopulmonary resuscitation performer in a moving ambulance to improve chest compression quality.
    Feng SY; Song YQ; Zhang YL; Li Y
    Singapore Med J; 2013 Nov; 54(11):645-8. PubMed ID: 24276102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Prehospital randomised assessment of a mechanical compression device in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC): a pragmatic, cluster randomised trial and economic evaluation.
    Gates S; Lall R; Quinn T; Deakin CD; Cooke MW; Horton J; Lamb SE; Slowther AM; Woollard M; Carson A; Smyth M; Wilson K; Parcell G; Rosser A; Whitfield R; Williams A; Jones R; Pocock H; Brock N; Black JJ; Wright J; Han K; Shaw G; Blair L; Marti J; Hulme C; McCabe C; Nikolova S; Ferreira Z; Perkins GD
    Health Technol Assess; 2017 Mar; 21(11):1-176. PubMed ID: 28393757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Mechanical versus manual chest compression for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC): a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial.
    Perkins GD; Lall R; Quinn T; Deakin CD; Cooke MW; Horton J; Lamb SE; Slowther AM; Woollard M; Carson A; Smyth M; Whitfield R; Williams A; Pocock H; Black JJ; Wright J; Han K; Gates S;
    Lancet; 2015 Mar; 385(9972):947-55. PubMed ID: 25467566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Quality Comparison of the Manual Chest Compression and the Mechanical Chest Compression During Difficult Transport Conditions.
    Bekgöz B; Şan İ; Ergin M
    J Emerg Med; 2020 Mar; 58(3):432-438. PubMed ID: 32229137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Mechanical chest compressions improved aspects of CPR in the LINC trial.
    Esibov A; Banville I; Chapman FW; Boomars R; Box M; Rubertsson S
    Resuscitation; 2015 Jun; 91():116-21. PubMed ID: 25766094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest.
    Wang PL; Brooks SC
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2018 Aug; 8(8):CD007260. PubMed ID: 30125048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dispatcher-assisted compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation provides best quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation by laypersons: A randomised controlled single-blinded manikin trial.
    Spelten O; Warnecke T; Wetsch WA; Schier R; Böttiger BW; Hinkelbein J
    Eur J Anaesthesiol; 2016 Aug; 33(8):575-80. PubMed ID: 26908002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation on manikins: on the floor and in the bed.
    Jäntti H; Silfvast T; Turpeinen A; Kiviniemi V; Uusaro A
    Acta Anaesthesiol Scand; 2009 Oct; 53(9):1131-7. PubMed ID: 19388894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Quality between mechanical compression on reducible stretcher versus manual compression on standard stretcher in small elevator.
    Kim TH; Hong KJ; Sang Do S; Kim CH; Song SW; Song KJ; Ro YS; Ahn KO; Jang DB
    Am J Emerg Med; 2016 Aug; 34(8):1604-9. PubMed ID: 27318749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Manual versus Mechanical Chest Compressions on Surfaces of Varying Softness with or without Backboards: A Randomized, Crossover Manikin Study.
    Putzer G; Fiala A; Braun P; Neururer S; Biechl K; Keilig B; Ploner W; Fop E; Paal P
    J Emerg Med; 2016 Apr; 50(4):594-600.e1. PubMed ID: 26607696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Quality of mechanical, manual standard and active compression-decompression CPR on the arrest site and during transport in a manikin model.
    Sunde K; Wik L; Steen PA
    Resuscitation; 1997 Jun; 34(3):235-42. PubMed ID: 9178384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. In a bed or on the floor? - The effect of realistic hospital resuscitation training: A randomised controlled trial.
    Mygind-Klausen T; Jæger A; Hansen C; Aagaard R; Krogh LQ; Nebsbjerg MA; Krogh K; Løfgren B
    Am J Emerg Med; 2018 Jul; 36(7):1236-1241. PubMed ID: 29276031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.