# automated CPR-the LUCAS device **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 3, 2016, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631 "2016-08-03T13:48:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![rbroome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/838e76/32.png) [@rbroome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rbroome)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2016, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/1 "2016-08-03T13:48:04Z")
Our local fire chief gave a briefing on recent changes in the fire department (which provides EMTs-but not ambulances in our area). He spoke highly of the department’s experience with the LUCAS device-an automated electrically driven CPR device. Here is one article discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the machine. > **[Risk versus Benefit of LUCAS: Is It Worth It?](https://pubs.asahq.org/anesthesiology/article/120/4/797/11777/The-Risk-versus-Benefit-of-LUCASIs-It-Worth-It)** > > THE well-written article by Deras et al.,1 “Fatal Pancreatic Injury Due to Trauma After Successful Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation With Automatic Mechanical Chest Compression,” presents an unfortunate case of a patient with resuscitated cardiac arrest... The fire chief said their experience is that it moved their CPR patient survival from the low 30s to the mid 40 percent. I am not knowledgable on the subject. Do any experts here know about these devices and have any experience with them? ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2016, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/2 "2016-08-03T14:02:41Z")
I’m no expert but I remember reading an article recently that in one case, the patient was revived but only after CPR was manually performed for over an hour. So if that’s necessary in some cases, it would be easier to do so using an automated device. (And if it’s really valuable, perhaps such devices will be as common as AEDs are today.) ---
**Author:** ![Dickerman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/8baadc/32.png) [@Dickerman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dickerman)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2016, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/3 "2016-08-03T17:55:11Z")
> [@rbroome](#): > > The fire chief said their experience is that it moved their CPR patient survival from the low 30s to the mid 40 percent. Those are very high CPR survival rates, especially if it’s for out-of-hospital events. Can you say where this is? It would be interesting to see if there’s data available. ---
**Author:** ![steatopygia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steatopygia/32/3132_2.png) [@steatopygia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steatopygia)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2016, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/4 "2016-08-03T21:11:34Z")
> [@Dickerman](#): > > Those are very high CPR survival rates, especially if it’s for out-of-hospital events. Can you say where this is? It would be interesting to see if there’s data available. I agree that those numbers are suspiciously high. Those devices are intended to provide consistent high quality compressions, and in the case of the LUCAS device, enhanced negative pressure on the recoil. The benefits are freeing up a provider and a decrease in interruptions of compression. A downside is the time spent attaching the device and the likelihood of compressions being interrupted while being attached. I predict that these devices will become more and more common because, here comes my bias, healthcare administrators LOVE to spend money on equipment. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2016, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/5 "2016-08-03T23:50:44Z")
The biggest potential benefit of these devices is that it’s probably a lot easier to use, with less training, than CPR. But I doubt it’ll actually realize that potential. The problem is the same as with AEDs: An AED is actually really user-friendly, and probably could be used successfully by someone with no training at all: It tells you exactly what you need to do. But the catch is that the only way you’d realize how easy it is to use is to get that training anyway. So someone genuinely untrained probably won’t use it, even though they could. ---
**Author:** ![Dickerman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/8baadc/32.png) [@Dickerman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dickerman)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2016, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/6 "2016-08-04T01:44:29Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > An AED is actually really user-friendly, and probably could be used successfully by someone with no training at all: It tells you exactly what you need to do. Indeed: [http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/100/16/1703](http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/100/16/1703) ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2016, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/7 "2016-08-04T11:30:38Z")
Without a subscription (which I assume most of us lack), that link doesn’t even contain an abstract. I presume that the sixth-graders did nearly as well as the trained pros? ---
**Author:** ![bob\_2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bob_2/32/3341_2.png) [@bob\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bob_2)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2016, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/8 "2016-08-04T11:49:53Z")
> [@Dickerman](#): > > Indeed: [http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/100/16/1703](http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/100/16/1703) That was published in 1999 (the reference to polaroid photography made me look). Isn’t there a more recent study? ---
**Author:** ![rbroome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/838e76/32.png) [@rbroome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rbroome)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2016, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/9 "2016-08-04T13:39:02Z")
> [@Dickerman](#): > > Those are very high CPR survival rates, especially if it’s for out-of-hospital events. Can you say where this is? It would be interesting to see if there’s data available. I may have mis-interpreted the chiefs comments. I will email him and clarify. The fire district is in suburban New Orleans-Fire District #1 in St. Tammany Parish. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2016, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/10 "2016-08-04T14:17:01Z")
> [@Dickerman](#): > > Those are very high CPR survival rates, especially if it’s for out-of-hospital events. Can you say where this is? It would be interesting to see if there’s data available. I thought so too, but my guess this that the very low rates are for CPR specifically related to heart attack. CPR might be used on other cases, drowning or choking, for example, where the survival rate is higher. ---
**Author:** ![rbroome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/838e76/32.png) [@rbroome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rbroome)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2016, 11:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/11 "2016-08-05T11:57:31Z")
Actual information on the LUCAS device. Naturally, my memory of the details given in the public presentation was “cloudy”. Here are the actual results from the Fire District. From these, one can see that the device makes a positive difference. "Please see below the information you requesting regarding use of the LUCAS device on cardiac arrest patients throughout our entire fire district (wards 8 & 9). - We implemented LUCAS on November 17th 2014 (1 device at Central Station). The device was utilized 9 times between Nov. 17th 2014 and December 31st 2014. A pulse was restored 2 times. - 2015: We treated 91 Cardiac Arrest patients. LUCAS was utilized 83 times. A pulse was restored 37 times. - 2016: We’ve treated 45 Cardiac Arrest patients (between Jan-July). LUCAS has been utilized 43 times. A pulse has been restored 20 times. - LUCAS has been used a total of 135 times since it was introduced. A pulse has been restored a total of 59 times. Patients who fall into the “pulse restored” category had a pulse upon arrival at the hospital. We are unable to track patient outcome after their admitted into the hospital. As you can see the LUCAS device is a remarkable device that gives patients in cardiac arrest the best chance for survival. Without this device, the rate of return of a pulse doing manual CPR was 13 percent. We plan on purchasing another LUCAS device this year for the only remaining fire station that doesn’t have one, fire station 18 (Airport Rd.). Additionally, we have 96 firefighters trained as EMT and 16 firefighters trained as paramedics. The remainder of our firefighters are first responder certified and all firefighters are CPR certified. If you go to our website ([www.slidellfire.org](http://www.slidellfire.org)) and click on the YouTube icon towards the top right hand side of the page, you can watch a video of a LUCAS device demonstration we did at fire station 14 last year. I hope this answered your question and if you have any additional questions please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Chad A. Duffaut Sr. Chief of Administration/PIO St. Tammany Fire Protection District #1" ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2016, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/12 "2016-08-05T13:17:41Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Without a subscription (which I assume most of us lack), that link doesn’t even contain an abstract. I presume that the sixth-graders did nearly as well as the trained pros? I can read it just fine. Here’s the abstract: > [@](#): > > _Background_—Survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is strongly influenced by time to defibrillation. Wider availability of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) may decrease response times but only with increased lay use. Consequently, this study endeavored to improve our understanding of AED use in naive users by measuring times to shock and appropriateness of pad location. We chose sixth-grade students to simulate an extreme circumstance of unfamiliarity with the problem of OHCA and defibrillation. The children’s AED use was then compared with that of professionals. > > _Methods and Results_—With the use of a mock cardiac arrest scenario, AED use by 15 children was compared with that of 22 emergency medical technicians (EMTs) or paramedics. The primary end point was time from entry onto the cardiac arrest scene to delivery of the shock into simulated ventricular fibrillation. The secondary end point was appropriateness of pad placement. All subject performances were videotaped to assess safety of use and compliance with AED prompts to remain clear of the mannequin during shock delivery. Mean time to defibrillation was 90±14 seconds (range, 69 to 111 seconds) for the children and 67±10 seconds (range, 50 to 87 seconds) for the EMTs/paramedics (P\<0.0001). Electrode pad placement was appropriate for all subjects. All remained clear of the “patient” during shock delivery. > > _Conclusions_—During mock cardiac arrest, the speed of AED use by untrained children is only modestly slower than that of professionals. The difference between the groups is surprisingly small, considering the naïveté of the children as untutored first-time users. These findings suggest that widespread use of AEDs will require only modest training. For reference, I can read the whole thing and I don’t know what the problem on your end could be. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2016, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/13 "2016-08-05T13:20:39Z")
OK, this is odd. I can read it sometimes depending on the link. The link from the board is fine, but the DOI link I found hits me with a paywall. Weird. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/14 "2016-08-06T04:10:34Z")
And for me, the link from the board take me to a page that says I need a subscription to download the full article, and asks me to log in… but it turns out that if I click on the PDF link there, it lets me download it anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Dickerman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/8baadc/32.png) [@Dickerman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dickerman)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2016, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/automated-cpr-the-lucas-device/761631/15 "2016-08-06T05:44:30Z")
> [@rbroome](#): > > Actual information on the LUCAS device. Thank you!