More in general, I think the glove is not that new or good, for the following reasons:
- Most training manikins can already measure this data from sensors inside the manikin, which are more direct to implement, simpler, cleaner and cheaper than an external glove. (Personally I believe that a good instructor is the best aid though, but that's another story.)
- A glove is something quite "personal". Would you put your hand in the same glove already used by 10 other people, some of them tense and sweating, in the same training session?
- During real CPR (no training) at least two rescuers should alternate every two minutes, so you need two gloves (no interruptions). That's already more expensive than one glove. Furthermore, accelerometer-based devices already exist that do the same, and they are placed between the chest and the hand, without needing a glove. Additionally, CPR quality can also be assessed via ECG alone, which is something the AED can do. Sure, real time ECG+accelerometer analysis is better, but it exists already.
Unfortunately, ECG rhythm alone does not correlate with effective CPR. Sure, the ECG waveform changes with compressions, but it is not a good indicator of actual blood flow and computer models trying to predict bloodflow by ECG alone is not in any products today. Devices on the market today (including the new Zoll E,R and AED Plus/Pro Series, in addition to the Phillips Heartstart Mrx Q-CPR) all rely on an accelerometer to determine if the chest is being compressed deep enough.
The whole line-up consists of the $60 Amps in-ears and $100 Tracks on-ear headphones, which both also come in slightly souped-up and pricier HD variations at $100 and $130, respectively.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
More in general, I think the glove is not that new or good, for the following reasons:
- Most training manikins can already measure this data from sensors inside the manikin, which are more direct to implement, simpler, cleaner and cheaper than an external glove. (Personally I believe that a good instructor is the best aid though, but that's another story.)
- A glove is something quite "personal". Would you put your hand in the same glove already used by 10 other people, some of them tense and sweating, in the same training session?
- During real CPR (no training) at least two rescuers should alternate every two minutes, so you need two gloves (no interruptions). That's already more expensive than one glove. Furthermore, accelerometer-based devices already exist that do the same, and they are placed between the chest and the hand, without needing a glove. Additionally, CPR quality can also be assessed via ECG alone, which is something the AED can do. Sure, real time ECG+accelerometer analysis is better, but it exists already.
Unfortunately, ECG rhythm alone does not correlate with effective CPR. Sure, the ECG waveform changes with compressions, but it is not a good indicator of actual blood flow and computer models trying to predict bloodflow by ECG alone is not in any products today. Devices on the market today (including the new Zoll E,R and AED Plus/Pro Series, in addition to the Phillips Heartstart Mrx Q-CPR) all rely on an accelerometer to determine if the chest is being compressed deep enough.