Objective: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the use of mechanical chest compression (meCC) devices for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in emergency departments might have increased. However, there are few reports yet of such an increase in use. This study aimed to assess the current status of meCC device utilization in emergency medical institutions nationwide through a survey. Methods: This cross-sectional study conducted a survey from August 20, 2022 to September 29, 2022, using emails and text messages to target 287 out of a total of 409 emergency medical institutions nationwide for which contact information was obtained. Results: Of the 287 emergency medical institutions, 127 responded (44.2% response rate). Of these, 74 (58.3%) reported using meCC devices. The utilization rates were highest in the regional emergency medical center, followed by local emergency medical centers and local emergency medical agencies (93.3% vs. 67.3% vs. 27.1%, respectively; P<0.001). The most common reason for device purchases was to reduce rescuer fatigue and ensure high-quality CPR. The second reason was personnel shortages, while the regional emergency medical center gave a higher priority to the protection of medical staff from COVID-19. The meCC device group reported significantly higher cases of CPR (100 or more cases per year) compared to the non-meCC device group (64.9% vs. 24.6%; P<0.001) although no difference was shown in the total number of medical staff participated in CPR between the groups. Also, 90.5% of the meCC group expressed satisfaction with using the device. Conclusion More than 50% of emergency medical institutions used meCC devices in CPR, citing reasons such as reducing rescuer fatigue and ensuring high-quality CPR.

Forty six patients (23 in-family and 23 out-family child sexual offenders) diagnosed with pedophilia participated in this study. For each patient, computerized objective data, obtained from the doctors, nurses, psychologists, and prosecutors involved, and the hospital information system, were collected. Immediately after the authors collected data that included any personal identifying information, it was replaced by random numbers to prevent bias and to protect privacy. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 20.0 for MS Windows. Comparative items on demographic characteristics were evaluated by a paired t test and chi-square test. Out-family child sexual offenders were younger, assaulted younger victims, and possessed a higher sexual recidivism rate than in-family sexual offenders did (P<0.05). The four scales of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory showed a significant difference between in-family and out-family child sexual offenders. There was no statistically significant difference in the victim's gender and the incidence of comorbid psychiatric disease between in-family and out-family child sexual offenders.
Bias (Epidemiology) ; Child* ; Criminals* ; Forensic Medicine ; Hospital Information Systems ; Humans ; Incidence ; MMPI* ; Pedophilia* ; Privacy ; Psychology ; Sex Offenses ; Weights and Measures