Adam Cheng1, Claudia Belanger, Brandi Wan, Jennifer Davidson, Yiqun Lin. 1. From the KidSim-ASPIRE Research Program (A.C.), Section of Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, University of Calgary, Alberta Children's Hospital, Calgary, Alberta; School of Kinesiology and Health Studies (C.B.), Queens University, Kingston, Ontario; School of Nursing (B.W.), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia; and KidSIM-ASPIRE Simulation Research Program (J.D., Y.L.), Alberta Children's Hospital, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed on a mattress decreases effective chest compression depth. Using a CPR board partially attenuates mattress compressibility. We aimed to determine the effect of a CPR board, a slider transfer board, a CPR board with a slider transfer board, and a flat spine board on chest compression depth with a mannequin placed on an emergency department mattress. METHODS: The study used a cross-over study design. The CPR-certified healthcare providers performed 2 minutes of compressions on a mannequin in five conditions, an emergency department mattress with: (a) no hard surface, (b) a CPR board, (c) a slider transfer board, (d) a CPR board and slider transfer board, and (e) a flat spine board. Compression depths were measured from two sources for each condition: (a) an internal device measuring sternum-to-spine compression and (b) an external device measuring sternum-to-spine compression plus mattress compression. The difference of the two measures (ie, depleted compression depth) was summarized and compared between conditions. RESULTS: A total of 10,203 individual compressions from 10 participants were analyzed. The mean depleted compression depths (percentage depletion) secondary to mattress effect were the following: 23.6 mm (29.7%) on a mattress only, 13.7 mm (19.5%) on a CPR board, 16.9 mm (23.1%) on a slider transfer board, 11.9 mm (17.3%) on a slider transfer board plus backboard, and 10.3 mm (15.4%) on a flat spine board. The differences in percentage depletion across conditions were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation providers should use a CPR board and slider transfer board or a flat spine board alone because these conditions are associated with the smallest amount of mattress compressibility.
INTRODUCTION: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed on a mattress decreases effective chest compression depth. Using a CPR board partially attenuates mattress compressibility. We aimed to determine the effect of a CPR board, a slider transfer board, a CPR board with a slider transfer board, and a flat spine board on chest compression depth with a mannequin placed on an emergency department mattress. METHODS: The study used a cross-over study design. The CPR-certified healthcare providers performed 2 minutes of compressions on a mannequin in five conditions, an emergency department mattress with: (a) no hard surface, (b) a CPR board, (c) a slider transfer board, (d) a CPR board and slider transfer board, and (e) a flat spine board. Compression depths were measured from two sources for each condition: (a) an internal device measuring sternum-to-spine compression and (b) an external device measuring sternum-to-spine compression plus mattress compression. The difference of the two measures (ie, depleted compression depth) was summarized and compared between conditions. RESULTS: A total of 10,203 individual compressions from 10 participants were analyzed. The mean depleted compression depths (percentage depletion) secondary to mattress effect were the following: 23.6 mm (29.7%) on a mattress only, 13.7 mm (19.5%) on a CPR board, 16.9 mm (23.1%) on a slider transfer board, 11.9 mm (17.3%) on a slider transfer board plus backboard, and 10.3 mm (15.4%) on a flat spine board. The differences in percentage depletion across conditions were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation providers should use a CPR board and slider transfer board or a flat spine board alone because these conditions are associated with the smallest amount of mattress compressibility.
Authors: Debora Gugelmin-Almeida; Michael Jones; Carol Clark; Ursula Rolfe; Jonathan Williams Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2022-09-17 Impact factor: 3.860
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