resQPOD

motomedic

motomedic

Forum Crew Member
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Im a new hire/paramedic with AMR. Going through my accreditation with the county im in we have this device called the resQPOD. Went through the video and training on it today. seems like a pretty sweet tool to use, cant wait to use it. ill prob forget its there to be honest but anywho; here is the website if you care to check it.

http://www.advancedcirculatory.com/

Does anyone else use this?? wondering how effective it actually is on a call..
 
motomedic said:
Im a new hire/paramedic with AMR. Going through my accreditation with the county im in we have this device called the resQPOD. Went through the video and training on it today. seems like a pretty sweet tool to use, cant wait to use it. ill prob forget its there to be honest but anywho; here is the website if you care to check it.

http://www.advancedcirculatory.com/

Does anyone else use this?? wondering how effective it actually is on a call..
Click to expand...

I've been heavily involved locally with the ResQ Trial (pod and pump)for the last 2+ years on the training and follow up end. Our area was involved in the field trials and yes, we've seen some positive neuroligical outcomes.

I've got a training disc if you would like. Would be happy to send it along.
 
I've never had a chance to use the device myself... however, the theory behind it is pretty sound. I would not surprise me to learn that there really is some enhanced circulation to be had from this. Maximal effectiveness, it seems, requires that the patient be intubated or that there be a good LMA or mask seal. I'd be no worse than normal, and it has these nice blinky lights to help time the ventilations...
 
We've been using them for nearly a year here, they work great - no major complaints that I've heard. Plus, the statistics on them are impressive.
 
Akulahawk said:
I've never had a chance to use the device myself... however, the theory behind it is pretty sound. I would not surprise me to learn that there really is some enhanced circulation to be had from this. Maximal effectiveness, it seems, requires that the patient be intubated or that there be a good LMA or mask seal. I'd be no worse than normal, and it has these nice blinky lights to help time the ventilations...
Click to expand...

The ResQ Pod is a CPR assist device. To put it in the shortest paragraph possible....the impedance (Pod) device prevents a loss of intrathorasic negative pressure during the decompression cycle. By improving venous return and combined with quality compressions, the evidence so far shows a measurable improvement in neurological outcomes with fewer post arrest complications.

Hawk...you are right on the seal or secured airway. The blinky light is a breath timing light used when a secured airway is in place.
 
medic_texas said:
We've been using them for nearly a year here, they work great - no major complaints that I've heard. Plus, the statistics on them are impressive.
Click to expand...

Any thoughts on adding a pump to the mix? The Pod's in regular use here however not in every area yet. Mid way through the field trial, FDA approved the use of the pod.
 
rescue99 said:
Any thoughts on adding a pump to the mix? The Pod's in regular use here however not in every area yet. Mid way through the field trial, FDA approved the use of the pod.
Click to expand...
You mean a ResQPod teamed up with a thumper kind of device? Might be kind of interesting... Transport Vent+ResQPod , Thumper... and a well secured patient under said thumper... As long as the piston doesn't become malpositioned...
 
Akulahawk said:
You mean a ResQPod teamed up with a thumper kind of device? Might be kind of interesting... Transport Vent+ResQPod , Thumper... and a well secured patient under said thumper... As long as the piston doesn't become malpositioned...
Click to expand...

The "ResQ Trial" combined the Pod with a manned pump that looks like a car buffer with a plunger stuck on the end. It isn't a thumper but acts as a vacuum/compression device. In addition, the study concentrates on modifying the usual hand position and focusing on ventilation techniques. A simple change in hand position is expected to become best practice in the near future I do believe. Most areas in and around here already modify.

PS: The pump theory came from a real patient who was saved by a toilet plunger...at least in a small way!
 
rescue99 said:
The "ResQ Trial" combined the Pod with a manned pump that looks like a car buffer with a plunger stuck on the end. It isn't a thumper but acts as a vacuum/compression device. In addition, the study concentrates on modifying the usual hand position and focusing on ventilation techniques. A simple change in hand position is expected to become best practice in the near future I do believe. Most areas in and around here already modify.

PS: The pump theory came from a real patient who was saved by a toilet plunger...at least in a small way!
Click to expand...
I was using "thumper" in a more generic manner to describe any mechanical device that performs CPR instead of a human... The change in hand placement sounds interesting... can you PM me some info about that?
 
I have used one a couple times, didn't notice much of a difference on patient outcome seeing as they died, BUT I do like it for the timing light. It's a good reminder when you're thinking about other things to bag in a timed manner.
 
Sasha said:
I have used one a couple times, didn't notice much of a difference on patient outcome seeing as they died, BUT I do like it for the timing light. It's a good reminder when you're thinking about other things to bag in a timed manner.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the disco light it pretty nice. B)

Most people think the impedance device is an airway assist device when it's actually a CPR assist.
 
I have not seen much difference in the 20 some RQPs I have used. I still hold my theories on it.
What has worked, and is proved over and over for my crew is..... faster, uninterupted CPR. About 120 compressions a minute fast. Since 2005 and the initial AHA study started to break wind, we tried it... and brought folks back that probably should not have been. The RQP came to us around 2007, but I just have not seen any further improvement than the high quality CPR we do now. I have about 30 ROSC pts since then..... as apposed to maybe 3 or 4 in a 5 year span.
3 of those codes this year are walking today. ( and I have not used the RQP on them ).
Im documenting... and reporting the findings. Unfortunately I am not part of any study other than my own.
 
rescue99 said:
I've been heavily involved locally with the ResQ Trial (pod and pump)for the last 2+ years on the training and follow up end. Our area was involved in the field trials and yes, we've seen some positive neuroligical outcomes.

I've got a training disc if you would like. Would be happy to send it along.
Click to expand...

Our company has that disc. Thank you though, hope to use it soon. Gotta just make sure I remember its there. so many tools to use now!! thanks again.
 
We just started using them on Tuesday, I have mixed feelings. It's not like I'm gonna be dropping a Kingtube with it, my medic or fire will have already done it. From my understanding, it worked effectively on pigs and not much difference on humans. It's all fire, unless we get on scene first or a BLS crew on a transer gets an arrest.
 
The largest EMS provider in my area utilizes Res Q Pod and initially had a near >30% increase of ROSC and have been using them for nearly 4-5 years (they were one of the field trial areas). Ironically, it has remarkably dropped over the past few years.

Although, it should not be a factor but the costs is. The price being nearly $100 each and not able to recoup makes it not attractive to managers. The discussion of costs versus the percentage of ROSC.

I foresee this along with induced hypothermia for cardiac arrest and especially ROSC as a new standard but again limitations of being cost prohibitive .

R/r 911
 
So this product works by preventing air from passively entering the lungs during CPR which helps keep intrathoracic pressure down which helps create a negative pressure on the up stroke of CPR which the heart expands into, increasing cardiac output? Don't most BVM's have a one way valve that will only allow air into the patient when the bag is squeezed anyway? I don't see how this is any different from what we already do.
 
emtbill said:
So this product works by preventing air from passively entering the lungs during CPR which helps keep intrathoracic pressure down which helps create a negative pressure on the up stroke of CPR which the heart expands into, increasing cardiac output? Don't most BVM's have a one way valve that will only allow air into the patient when the bag is squeezed anyway? I don't see how this is any different from what we already do.
Click to expand...

Impedence is the difference. An active prevention. Try breathing through one. Passive loss is not possible with a proper seal. Although it is possible, it takes pressure to be able to do it.
 
We have been involved in the Rescue trials for about 2 years in my area,and I have heard of a lot of real positive results.Our medical control Authority just ended the trials about a month ago.
 
Rumor has it that the company lost its funding. I believe the source of the info was from JEMS in a tiny little article.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top