Audrey L Blewer1, Mary E Putt1, Lance B Becker1, Barbara J Riegel1, Jiaqi Li1, Marion Leary1, Judy A Shea1, James N Kirkpatrick1, Robert A Berg1, Vinay M Nadkarni1, Peter W Groeneveld1, Benjamin S Abella2. 1. From the Department of Emergency Medicine and Center for Resuscitation Science (A.L.B., L.B.B., M.L., B.S.A.), Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology (A.L.B., M.E.P., J.L.), School of Nursing (B.J.R., M.L.), New Courtland Center for Transitions and Healthy (B.J.R.), Department of Medicine (J.A.S., J.N.K., P.W.G.), Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care (R.A.B.), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (R.A.B., V.M.N.); and Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Pennsylvania (P.W.G.). 2. From the Department of Emergency Medicine and Center for Resuscitation Science (A.L.B., L.B.B., M.L., B.S.A.), Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology (A.L.B., M.E.P., J.L.), School of Nursing (B.J.R., M.L.), New Courtland Center for Transitions and Healthy (B.J.R.), Department of Medicine (J.A.S., J.N.K., P.W.G.), Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care (R.A.B.), University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (R.A.B., V.M.N.); and Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Pennsylvania (P.W.G.). benjamin.abella@uphs.upenn.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training rates in the United States are low, highlighting the need to develop CPR educational approaches that are simpler, with broader dissemination potential. The minimum training required to ensure long-term skill retention remains poorly characterized. We compared CPR skill retention among laypersons randomized to training with video-only (VO; no manikin) with those trained with a video self-instruction kit (VSI; with manikin). We hypothesized that VO training would be noninferior to the VSI approach with respect to chest compression (CC) rate. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a prospective, cluster randomized trial of CPR education for family members of patients with high-risk cardiac conditions on hospital cardiac units, using a multicenter pragmatic design. Eight hospitals were randomized to offer either VO or VSI training before discharge using volunteer trainers. CPR skills were assessed 6 months post training. Mean CC rate among those trained with VO compared with those trained with VSI was assessed with a noninferiority margin set at 8 CC per min; as a secondary outcome, mean differences in CC depth were assessed. From February 2012 to May 2015, 1464 subjects were enrolled and 522 subjects completed a skills assessment. The mean CC rates were 87.7 (VO) CC per min and 89.3 (VSI) CC per min; we concluded noninferiority for VO based on a mean difference of -1.6 (90% confidence interval, -5.2 to 2.1). The mean CC depth was 40.2 mm (VO) and 45.8 mm (VSI) with a mean difference of -5.6 (95% confidence interval, -7.6 to -3.7). Results were similar after multivariate regression adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, prospective trial of CPR skill retention, VO training yielded a noninferior difference in CC rate compared with VSI training. CC depth was greater in the VSI group. These findings suggest a potential trade-off in efforts for broad dissemination of basic CPR skills; VO training might allow for greater scalability and dissemination, but with a potential reduction in CC depth. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01514656.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training rates in the United States are low, highlighting the need to develop CPR educational approaches that are simpler, with broader dissemination potential. The minimum training required to ensure long-term skill retention remains poorly characterized. We compared CPR skill retention among laypersons randomized to training with video-only (VO; no manikin) with those trained with a video self-instruction kit (VSI; with manikin). We hypothesized that VO training would be noninferior to the VSI approach with respect to chest compression (CC) rate. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a prospective, cluster randomized trial of CPR education for family members of patients with high-risk cardiac conditions on hospital cardiac units, using a multicenter pragmatic design. Eight hospitals were randomized to offer either VO or VSI training before discharge using volunteer trainers. CPR skills were assessed 6 months post training. Mean CC rate among those trained with VO compared with those trained with VSI was assessed with a noninferiority margin set at 8 CC per min; as a secondary outcome, mean differences in CC depth were assessed. From February 2012 to May 2015, 1464 subjects were enrolled and 522 subjects completed a skills assessment. The mean CC rates were 87.7 (VO) CC per min and 89.3 (VSI) CC per min; we concluded noninferiority for VO based on a mean difference of -1.6 (90% confidence interval, -5.2 to 2.1). The mean CC depth was 40.2 mm (VO) and 45.8 mm (VSI) with a mean difference of -5.6 (95% confidence interval, -7.6 to -3.7). Results were similar after multivariate regression adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, prospective trial of CPR skill retention, VO training yielded a noninferior difference in CC rate compared with VSI training. CC depth was greater in the VSI group. These findings suggest a potential trade-off in efforts for broad dissemination of basic CPR skills; VO training might allow for greater scalability and dissemination, but with a potential reduction in CC depth. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01514656.
Authors: Bonnie Lynch; Eric L Einspruch; Graham Nichol; Lance B Becker; Tom P Aufderheide; Ahamed Idris Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Philippe Généreux; Mahesh V Madhavan; Gary S Mintz; Akiko Maehara; Tullio Palmerini; Laura Lasalle; Ke Xu; Tom McAndrew; Ajay Kirtane; Alexandra J Lansky; Sorin J Brener; Roxana Mehran; Gregg W Stone Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Ian G Stiell; Siobhan P Brown; James Christenson; Sheldon Cheskes; Graham Nichol; Judy Powell; Blair Bigham; Laurie J Morrison; Jonathan Larsen; Erik Hess; Christian Vaillancourt; Daniel P Davis; Clifton W Callaway Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Ingela Hasselqvist-Ax; Gabriel Riva; Johan Herlitz; Mårten Rosenqvist; Jacob Hollenberg; Per Nordberg; Mattias Ringh; Martin Jonsson; Christer Axelsson; Jonny Lindqvist; Thomas Karlsson; Leif Svensson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-06-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Roberto R Giraldez; Robert M Clare; Renato D Lopes; Anthony J Dalby; Dorairaj Prabhakaran; Gerard X Brogan; Robert P Giugliano; Stefan K James; Jean-Francois Tanguay; Charles V Pollack; Robert A Harrington; Eugene Braunwald; L Kristin Newby Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2013-02-13 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Audrey L Blewer; Jiaqi Li; Daniel J Ikeda; Marion Leary; David G Buckler; Barbara Riegel; Sunita Desai; Peter W Groeneveld; Mary E Putt; Benjamin S Abella Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2016-04-19 Impact factor: 2.486
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