AIMS: Chest compression quality is a determinant of survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). ERC 2005 guidelines recommend the use of technical devices to support rescuers giving compressions. This prospective randomized study reviewed influence of different feedback configurations on survival and compression quality. MATERIALS AND METHODS:312 patients suffering an OHCA were randomly allocated to two different feedback configurations. In the limited feedback group a metronome and visual feedback was used. In the extended feedback group voice prompts were added. A training program was completed prior to implementation, performance debriefing was conducted throughout the study. RESULTS:Survival did not differ between the extended and limited feedback groups (47.8% vs 43.9%, p = 0.49). Average compression depth (mean ± SD: 4.74 ± 0.86 cm vs 4.84 ± 0.93 cm, p = 0.31) was similar in both groups. There were no differences in compression rate (103 ± 7 vs 102 ± 5 min(-1), p=0.74) or hands-off fraction (16.16% ± 0.07 to 17.04% ± 0.07, p = 0.38). Bystander CPR, public arrest location, presenting rhythm and chest compression depth were predictors of short term survival (ROSC to ED). CONCLUSIONS: Even limited CPR-feedback combined with training and ongoing debriefing leads to high chest compression quality. Bystander CPR, location, rhythm and chest compression depth are determinants of survival from out of hospital cardiac arrest. Addition of voice prompts does neither modify CPR quality nor outcome in OHCA. CC depth significantly influences survival and therefore more focus should be put on correct delivery. Further studies are needed to examine the best configuration of feedback to improve CPR quality and survival. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00449969), http://www.clinicalTrials.gov.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: Chest compression quality is a determinant of survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). ERC 2005 guidelines recommend the use of technical devices to support rescuers giving compressions. This prospective randomized study reviewed influence of different feedback configurations on survival and compression quality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 312 patients suffering an OHCA were randomly allocated to two different feedback configurations. In the limited feedback group a metronome and visual feedback was used. In the extended feedback group voice prompts were added. A training program was completed prior to implementation, performance debriefing was conducted throughout the study. RESULTS: Survival did not differ between the extended and limited feedback groups (47.8% vs 43.9%, p = 0.49). Average compression depth (mean ± SD: 4.74 ± 0.86 cm vs 4.84 ± 0.93 cm, p = 0.31) was similar in both groups. There were no differences in compression rate (103 ± 7 vs 102 ± 5 min(-1), p=0.74) or hands-off fraction (16.16% ± 0.07 to 17.04% ± 0.07, p = 0.38). Bystander CPR, public arrest location, presenting rhythm and chest compression depth were predictors of short term survival (ROSC to ED). CONCLUSIONS: Even limited CPR-feedback combined with training and ongoing debriefing leads to high chest compression quality. Bystander CPR, location, rhythm and chest compression depth are determinants of survival from out of hospital cardiac arrest. Addition of voice prompts does neither modify CPR quality nor outcome in OHCA. CC depth significantly influences survival and therefore more focus should be put on correct delivery. Further studies are needed to examine the best configuration of feedback to improve CPR quality and survival. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00449969), http://www.clinicalTrials.gov.
Authors: Theresa M Olasveengen; Mary E Mancini; Gavin D Perkins; Suzanne Avis; Steven Brooks; Maaret Castrén; Sung Phil Chung; Julie Considine; Keith Couper; Raffo Escalante; Tetsuo Hatanaka; Kevin K C Hung; Peter Kudenchuk; Swee Han Lim; Chika Nishiyama; Giuseppe Ristagno; Federico Semeraro; Christopher M Smith; Michael A Smyth; Christian Vaillancourt; Jerry P Nolan; Mary Fran Hazinski; Peter T Morley Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Je Sung You; Sung Phil Chung; Chul Ho Chang; Incheol Park; Hye Sun Lee; SeungHo Kim; Hahn Shick Lee Journal: Emerg Med J Date: 2012-08-27 Impact factor: 2.740