INTRODUCTION: Quantitative CPR quality feedback systems improve adult CPR performance. Extension to pediatric patients is desirable; however, the anthropometric measurements of the pediatric chest pertinent to guide the development of pediatric-specific CPR monitoring systems are largely unknown. HYPOTHESIS: Adult-based CPR quality monitoring and feedback systems will require pediatric-specific tailoring and adaptation. METHODS: Anthropometric measurements pertinent to the development of pediatric-specific CPR quality monitoring systems were obtained in 150 children ages 6 months to 8 years. Standard descriptive statistics were calculated. Absolute depth point estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the American Heart Association (AHA) chest compression depth recommendations (1/3 and 1/2 Anterior-Posterior chest depth). Percentage of subjects for which the adult minimal feedback depth of 38mm would coach to achieve pediatric AHA target depths was determined. RESULTS: Point estimate averages for measurements pertinent to pediatric adaptation of CPR monitoring technology were: sternal width: 25.1mm [22.0-29.2]; sternal length: 98.7mm [95.3-102.1]; internipple distance: 120.0mm [117.2-122.8]; chin to sternal notch: 35.3mm [31.2-39.4]; 1/3 AP chest depth: 37.0mm [36.1-37.8]; and 1/2 AP chest depth: 55.4mm [54.2-56.7]. A minimal feedback depth of 38mm would meet the minimum pediatric AHA target for depth in 55% (82/148) of subjects, and coach too deep in only 2% (3/148). CONCLUSION: Extension of adult-based CPR quality monitoring and feedback systems will require pediatric-specific tailoring and adaptation. Future studies should examine chest compression depths in clinical settings with correlation to physiologic parameters to determine the best targets for pediatric CPR guidelines.
INTRODUCTION: Quantitative CPR quality feedback systems improve adult CPR performance. Extension to pediatric patients is desirable; however, the anthropometric measurements of the pediatric chest pertinent to guide the development of pediatric-specific CPR monitoring systems are largely unknown. HYPOTHESIS: Adult-based CPR quality monitoring and feedback systems will require pediatric-specific tailoring and adaptation. METHODS: Anthropometric measurements pertinent to the development of pediatric-specific CPR quality monitoring systems were obtained in 150 children ages 6 months to 8 years. Standard descriptive statistics were calculated. Absolute depth point estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the American Heart Association (AHA) chest compression depth recommendations (1/3 and 1/2 Anterior-Posterior chest depth). Percentage of subjects for which the adult minimal feedback depth of 38mm would coach to achieve pediatric AHA target depths was determined. RESULTS: Point estimate averages for measurements pertinent to pediatric adaptation of CPR monitoring technology were: sternal width: 25.1mm [22.0-29.2]; sternal length: 98.7mm [95.3-102.1]; internipple distance: 120.0mm [117.2-122.8]; chin to sternal notch: 35.3mm [31.2-39.4]; 1/3 AP chest depth: 37.0mm [36.1-37.8]; and 1/2 AP chest depth: 55.4mm [54.2-56.7]. A minimal feedback depth of 38mm would meet the minimum pediatric AHA target for depth in 55% (82/148) of subjects, and coach too deep in only 2% (3/148). CONCLUSION: Extension of adult-based CPR quality monitoring and feedback systems will require pediatric-specific tailoring and adaptation. Future studies should examine chest compression depths in clinical settings with correlation to physiologic parameters to determine the best targets for pediatric CPR guidelines.
Authors: Robert M Sutton; Dana Niles; Benjamin French; Matthew R Maltese; Jessica Leffelman; Joar Eilevstjønn; Heather Wolfe; Akira Nishisaki; Peter A Meaney; Robert A Berg; Vinay M Nadkarni Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2013-08-29 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Robert M Sutton; Dana Niles; Peter A Meaney; Richard Aplenc; Benjamin French; Benjamin S Abella; Evelyn L Lengetti; Robert A Berg; Mark A Helfaer; Vinay Nadkarni Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2011-06-06 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Robert M Sutton; Dana Niles; Peter A Meaney; Richard Aplenc; Benjamin French; Benjamin S Abella; Evelyn L Lengetti; Robert A Berg; Mark A Helfaer; Vinay Nadkarni Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Ryan W Morgan; Todd J Kilbaugh; Wesley Shoap; George Bratinov; Yuxi Lin; Ting-Chang Hsieh; Vinay M Nadkarni; Robert A Berg; Robert M Sutton Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2016-12-05 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Robert M Sutton; Heather Wolfe; Akira Nishisaki; Jessica Leffelman; Dana Niles; Peter A Meaney; Aaron Donoghue; Matthew R Maltese; Robert A Berg; Vinay M Nadkarni Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2013-08-15 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Natalie Jayaram; John A Spertus; Vinay Nadkarni; Robert A Berg; Fengming Tang; Tia Raymond; Anne-Marie Guerguerian; Paul S Chan Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2014-07
Authors: Robert M Sutton; Benjamin French; Akira Nishisaki; Dana E Niles; Matthew R Maltese; Lori Boyle; Mette Stavland; Joar Eilevstjønn; Kristy B Arbogast; Robert A Berg; Vinay M Nadkarni Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2012-09-06 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Gene Yong-Kwang Ong; Aloysius Jian Feng Ang; Amirzeb S O Aurangzeb; Elisabeth Sue Shuen Fong; Jun Yuan Tan; Zhao Jin Chen; Yiong Huak Chan; Phua Hwee Tang; Jen Heng Pek; Ian Maconochie; Kee Chong Ng; Vinay Nadkarni Journal: Resusc Plus Date: 2021-03-27
Authors: Robert M Sutton; Ron W Reeder; William Landis; Kathleen L Meert; Andrew R Yates; John T Berger; Christopher J Newth; Joseph A Carcillo; Patrick S McQuillen; Rick E Harrison; Frank W Moler; Murray M Pollack; Todd C Carpenter; Daniel A Notterman; Richard Holubkov; J Michael Dean; Vinay M Nadkarni; Robert A Berg Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2018-07-18 Impact factor: 6.251