# Situation: A newly hired nurse is completing orientation in the critical care department of a tertiary hospital, which covers the intensive care units, the hemodialysis unit and the in-hospital emergency response team. The emergency response team keeps a mechanical chest compression device for selected cases, such as a client in cardiac arrest who must be transported to the catheterization laboratory. Current resuscitation guidelines reserve the device for such situations rather than using it in every arrest. What is the reason?

> source: MyMerci (mymerci.kr)  
> url: https://mymerci.kr/pages/nclex_q.php?qn_id=630164  
> language: ko  
> subject: Nursing Practice V — Care of Clients with Maladaptive Patterns of Behavior; Care of Clients with Life-Threatening Conditions, Acute Multi-Organ Problems, High Acuity and Emergency Situations

## 문제

Situation: A newly hired nurse is completing orientation in the critical care department of a tertiary hospital, which covers the intensive care units, the hemodialysis unit and the in-hospital emergency response team.

The emergency response team keeps a mechanical chest compression device for selected cases, such as a client in cardiac arrest who must be transported to the catheterization laboratory. Current resuscitation guidelines reserve the device for such situations rather than using it in every arrest. What is the reason?

## 보기

1. Survival is no better than with good manual compressions **✔ 정답**
2. It can be applied only after an advanced airway is placed
3. It gives compressions too shallow for most adult chests
4. It must be stopped each time a defibrillator shock is given

**정답: 1**

## 해설

Randomized trials found no survival difference between mechanical and high-quality manual chest compressions, so routine use is not recommended. The device is considered when high-quality manual compressions are impractical or unsafe for rescuers, such as during transport or prolonged resuscitation, and trained teams keep pauses short when applying it.

## 심화 해설

Why mechanical CPR is reserved for selected situations

The key principle is not that the device is ineffective, but that routine mechanical chest compression has not been shown to improve survival compared with high-quality manual compressions. Large randomized trials and systematic reviews consistently report no meaningful difference in neurologically intact survival or overall survival between the two strategies [1][2][3].

PARAMEDIC trial was a pragmatic cluster-randomized trial that placed the LUCAS-2 mechanical device on emergency response vehicles and compared outcomes with manual CPR. It found no survival advantage for mechanical CPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest [2]. A Cochrane review of mechanical versus manual chest compressions reached the same conclusion: resuscitation strategies using mechanical devices did not improve neurologically intact survival compared with standard manual compressions [3].

The reason the device is still kept in the emergency response team’s equipment is that mechanical CPR becomes valuable when high-quality manual compressions are impractical or unsafe for rescuers. During transport to the catheterization laboratory, in a moving ambulance or elevator, or during prolonged resuscitation, manual compression quality deteriorates because of fatigue, limited space, and the need for the rescuer to stand during movement [4]. In these selected situations, the device can deliver consistent compressions while the team focuses on other tasks such as securing the airway, obtaining vascular access, or preparing for angiography [1][4].

Watch out! The device does not require an advanced airway before application — it can be placed while basic airway management is ongoing. It is also not stopped for every defibrillation attempt; trained teams minimize the pause and resume compressions immediately after shock delivery. The depth of mechanical compressions is generally set to meet adult guideline targets, so the concern is not that compressions are too shallow [4].

The clinical reasoning for reserving the device is therefore based on equipoise in outcomes plus logistical advantage in specific scenarios. Routine use adds cost, training burden, and potential for pauses during device application without improving survival [3][4]. Use is justified when the alternative — manual CPR — is likely to be suboptimal because of rescuer fatigue, transport conditions, or prolonged resuscitation needs [1][4].

| Comparison | Routine mechanical CPR | Selected mechanical CPR |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Evidence for survival benefit | No better than high-quality manual CPR | Same evidence base, but manual CPR is impractical in these settings |
| Typical situations | Every cardiac arrest | Transport to catheterization lab, prolonged resuscitation, rescuer safety risk |
| Key rationale | Equipoise — no outcome advantage | Maintains compression quality when manual CPR would deteriorate |
| Guideline position | Not recommended for routine use | Consider when manual compressions are unsafe or impractical |

The correct answer is option 1 because the central finding from the evidence is that survival with mechanical compressions is no better than with good manual compressions, so the device is not applied to every arrest. The other options describe limitations that are not supported by the evidence — the device can be used before advanced airway placement, compression depth is adjustable to adult targets, and defibrillation does not require removing the device if the team is trained to minimize pauses [1][2][3][4].References (research sources)

- [1]2025 Korean Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Part 4. Adult advanced life support.GuidelineKim TY, Ahn GJ, Cha KC, Kim DH, Sohn Y, Song Y, Shim G, Kim DK, Oh Y, Wi J, Youn CS, Lee ML, Lee MJ, Lee BK, Lee BH, Lee J, Lee CH, Lee H, Jang Y, Jang YS, Jung YH, Jung WJ, Chung SP, Cho GC, Heo JS, Hwang SO. (2026) · DOI: 10.15441/ceem.26.073

- [2]Mechanical versus manual chest compression for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (PARAMEDIC): a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial.RCT/clinical trialPerkins GD, Lall R, Quinn T, Deakin CD, Cooke MW, Horton J (2015) · DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61886-9

- [3]Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest.Research articleWang PL, Brooks SC (2018) · DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007260.pub4

- [4]Mechanical CPR: Who? When? How?Research articlePoole K, Couper K, Smyth MA, Yeung J, Perkins GD (2018) · DOI: 10.1186/s13054-018-2059-0

## 임상 시나리오

Mechanical CPR: When to UseReserve for transport and prolonged resuscitation
Mechanical chest compression devices show no survival benefit over high-quality manual compressions in routine cardiac arrest. Large trials report no difference in neurologically intact survival.

Use the device when manual compressions are impractical or unsafe: during transport to the catheterization lab, in moving vehicles, or during prolonged resuscitation when rescuer fatigue compromises compression quality.

CautionTrained teams must keep pauses short when applying the device. Do not interrupt compressions for defibrillation; the device can continue during rhythm analysis and shock delivery with proper safety precautions.

## 핵심 개념

- **Mechanical chest compression device** — A device that delivers automated, consistent chest compressions during CPR, used when manual compressions are impractical or unsafe
- **High-quality manual CPR** — Chest compressions at adequate rate, depth, and recoil with minimal interruptions, performed by trained rescuers
- **PARAMEDIC trial** — A cluster-randomized trial comparing LUCAS-2 mechanical CPR with manual CPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, finding no survival advantage
- **Neurologically intact survival** — Survival after cardiac arrest with preserved brain function, a key outcome measure in resuscitation research
- **Catheterization laboratory** — A specialized procedure room for cardiac catheterization, often requiring patient transport during ongoing CPR

## 같은 주제 문제

- [Situation: A 64-year-old man is in the intensive care unit (ICU) on day 2 after emergency …](https://mymerci.kr/pages/nclex_q.php?qn_id=630059)
- [Situation: A 64-year-old man is in the intensive care unit (ICU) on day 2 after emergency …](https://mymerci.kr/pages/nclex_q.php?qn_id=630060)
- [Situation: A 47-year-old woman is in the intensive care unit (ICU) with acute kidney injur…](https://mymerci.kr/pages/nclex_q.php?qn_id=630063)
- [Situation: A 47-year-old woman is in the intensive care unit (ICU) with acute kidney injur…](https://mymerci.kr/pages/nclex_q.php?qn_id=630064)
- [Situation: A 47-year-old woman is in the intensive care unit (ICU) with acute kidney injur…](https://mymerci.kr/pages/nclex_q.php?qn_id=630065)
- [Situation: A 34-year-old man is admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) after an intenti…](https://mymerci.kr/pages/nclex_q.php?qn_id=630161)
- [Situation: A 34-year-old man is admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) after an intenti…](https://mymerci.kr/pages/nclex_q.php?qn_id=630162)
- [Situation: A newly hired nurse is completing orientation in the critical care department o…](https://mymerci.kr/pages/nclex_q.php?qn_id=630163)

---

More free questions: [기출문제](https://mymerci.kr/)

_학습 참고용입니다. 실제 임상은 최신 지침과 소속 기관 프로토콜을 따르세요._