AIM OF THE STUDY: External chest compression (ECC) is an essential part of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and usually performed without any adjuncts. Although different supportive devices have been developed, none have yet been implemented as a standard procedure to guide rescuers in resuscitation. This study investigates the effects of the CPREzy-pad on ECC performed by first year medical students during simulated cardiac arrest. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and two subjects were randomised and asked to perform 5 min of single-rescuer-CPR. Group 1 (n = 111) was taught classic ECC, followed by ECC with the CPREzy and was tested in ECC with the CPREzy. Group 2 (n = 91) was taught and tested in classic ECC only. One week later each group was divided: Group 1A was tested in ECC with the CPREzy again; Group 1B was tested in classic ECC. Group 2A was taught and tested in ECC with CPREzy; Group 2B was tested in classic ECC again. Primary endpoints were compression rate (90-110/min) and compression depth (40-50mm). RESULTS: Comparing groups 1 and 2, ECC was significantly superior with CPREzy (correct rate: 93.7% versus 19.8%, p < or = 0.01; depth: 71.2% versus 34.1%, p < or = 0.01). The group tested with CPREzy initially 1 week later (2A; n = 36) improved significantly in correct compression rate (19.8% versus 88.9%, p < or = 0.01) and compression depth (34.1% versus 75.0%, p < or = 0.02). The control-group (2B; n = 55) without CPREzy demonstrated poor performance in both evaluations (correct rate: 19.8% versus 25.5%, depth: 34.1% versus 43.6%). CONCLUSION:CPREzy as a simple portable and re-usable device is able to improve performance of ECC in simulated cardiac arrest.
RCT Entities:
AIM OF THE STUDY: External chest compression (ECC) is an essential part of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and usually performed without any adjuncts. Although different supportive devices have been developed, none have yet been implemented as a standard procedure to guide rescuers in resuscitation. This study investigates the effects of the CPREzy-pad on ECC performed by first year medical students during simulated cardiac arrest. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and two subjects were randomised and asked to perform 5 min of single-rescuer-CPR. Group 1 (n = 111) was taught classic ECC, followed by ECC with the CPREzy and was tested in ECC with the CPREzy. Group 2 (n = 91) was taught and tested in classic ECC only. One week later each group was divided: Group 1A was tested in ECC with the CPREzy again; Group 1B was tested in classic ECC. Group 2A was taught and tested in ECC with CPREzy; Group 2B was tested in classic ECC again. Primary endpoints were compression rate (90-110/min) and compression depth (40-50mm). RESULTS: Comparing groups 1 and 2, ECC was significantly superior with CPREzy (correct rate: 93.7% versus 19.8%, p < or = 0.01; depth: 71.2% versus 34.1%, p < or = 0.01). The group tested with CPREzy initially 1 week later (2A; n = 36) improved significantly in correct compression rate (19.8% versus 88.9%, p < or = 0.01) and compression depth (34.1% versus 75.0%, p < or = 0.02). The control-group (2B; n = 55) without CPREzy demonstrated poor performance in both evaluations (correct rate: 19.8% versus 25.5%, depth: 34.1% versus 43.6%). CONCLUSION: CPREzy as a simple portable and re-usable device is able to improve performance of ECC in simulated cardiac arrest.
Authors: Blair L Bigham; Kent Koprowicz; Tom Rea; Paul Dorian; Tom P Aufderheide; Daniel P Davis; Judy Powell; Laurie J Morrison Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2011-03-31 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Marion Leary; David G Buckler; Daniel J Ikeda; Daiane A Saraiva; Robert A Berg; Vinay M Nadkarni; Audrey L Blewer; Benjamin S Abella Journal: World J Emerg Med Date: 2017
Authors: A Wutzler; S von Ulmenstein; M Bannehr; K Völk; J Förster; C Storm; W Haverkamp Journal: Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed Date: 2017-04-04 Impact factor: 0.840
Authors: Jolanta Majer; Milosz J Jaguszewski; Michael Frass; Marcin Leskiewicz; Jacek Smereka; Jerzy R Ładny; Oliver Robak; Łukasz Szarpak Journal: Cardiol J Date: 2018-08-29 Impact factor: 2.737
Authors: M Skorning; M Derwall; J C Brokmann; D Rörtgen; S Bergrath; J Pflipsen; S Beuerlein; R Rossaint; S K Beckers Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2011-03-24 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: Jasmeet Soar; Mary E Mancini; Farhan Bhanji; John E Billi; Jennifer Dennett; Judith Finn; Matthew Huei-Ming Ma; Gavin D Perkins; David L Rodgers; Mary Fran Hazinski; Ian Jacobs; Peter T Morley Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 5.262