Contributor: Aaron Lessen, MD Educational Pearls: Mechanical CPR (machine assisted compression devices) remains a hot topic of debate in emergency medicine Machine assisted CPR has been advocated to provide more consistent compressions in cardiac arrest and free up staff for other tasks. However, multiple studies have shown mechanical CPR provides no significant survival benefit yet increased rates of injury to the chest and abdomen from the devices. Unless a clear benefit can be found, mechanical CPR devices should not routinely replace traditional CPR in most situations For prolonged transport as well as resource-limited settings, these devices still may provide the only option for sustained resuscitations References Bonnes, J. et al. Manual Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Versus CPR Including a Mechanical Chest Compression Device in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis From Randomized and Observational Studies. Ann Emerg Med. 2016 Mar;67(3):349-360.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.09.023. Epub 2015 Nov 19. Wang, P. Brooks, S. Mechanical Versus Manual Chest Compressions for Cardiac Arrest. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Aug 20;8(8):CD007260. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007260.pub4. Summarized by Jackson Roos, MS4 | Edited by Erik Verzemnieks, MD