open access

Vol 76, No 3 (2018)
Original articles
Published online: 2017-12-15
Submitted: 2017-11-18
Accepted: 2017-11-30
Get Citation

The impact of the use of a CPRMeter monitor on quality of chest compressions: a prospective randomised trial, cross-simulation

Lukasz Iskrzycki, Jacek Smereka, Antonio Rodriguez-Nunez, Roberto Barcala Furelos, Cristian Abelarias Gomez, Halla Kaminska, Wojciech Wieczorek, Lukasz Szarpak, Klaudiusz Nadolny, Robert Galazkowski, Kurt Ruetzler, Jerzy Robert Ladny
DOI: 10.5603/KP.a2017.0255
·
Pubmed: 29297195
·
Kardiol Pol 2018;76(3):574-579.

open access

Vol 76, No 3 (2018)
Original articles
Published online: 2017-12-15
Submitted: 2017-11-18
Accepted: 2017-11-30

Abstract

 Background: Drowning is a common issue at many pools and beaches, and in seas all over the world. Lifeguards often act as bystanders, and therefore adequate training in high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and use of adequate equip­ment by lifeguards is essential.

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the recently introduced CPRMeter (Laerdal, Stavanger, Norway) on quality of CPR, if used by moderately experienced CPR providers. In particular, we tested the hypothesis that using the CPRMeter improves quality of chest compression by lifeguards compared to standard non-feedback CPR.

Methods: The study was designed as prospective, randomised, cross-over manikin trial. Fifty lifeguards of the Volunteer Water Rescue Service (WOPR), a Polish nationwide association specialised in water rescue, participated in this study. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to one of two groups: a feedback group and a non-feedback group. Participants swim a distance of 25 m in the pool, and then they were asked to haul a manikin for the second 25 m, simulating rescuing a drowning victim. Once participants finished the second 25-m distance, participants were asked to initiate 2-min basic life support according to the randomisation.

Results: The median quality of CPR score for the 2-min CPR session without feedback was 69 (33–77) compared to 84 (55–93) in the feedback group (p < 0.001). Compression score, mean depth, rate of adequate chest compressions/min, and overall mean rate during the CPR session improved significantly in the feedback group, compared to the non-feedback group.

Conclusions: Using the visual real-time feedback device significantly improved quality of CPR in our relatively unexperienced CPR providers. Better quality of bystander CPR is essential for clinical outcomes, and therefore feedback devices should be considered. Further clinical studies are needed to assess the effect of real-time visual devices, especially in bystander-CPR.

Abstract

 Background: Drowning is a common issue at many pools and beaches, and in seas all over the world. Lifeguards often act as bystanders, and therefore adequate training in high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and use of adequate equip­ment by lifeguards is essential.

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the recently introduced CPRMeter (Laerdal, Stavanger, Norway) on quality of CPR, if used by moderately experienced CPR providers. In particular, we tested the hypothesis that using the CPRMeter improves quality of chest compression by lifeguards compared to standard non-feedback CPR.

Methods: The study was designed as prospective, randomised, cross-over manikin trial. Fifty lifeguards of the Volunteer Water Rescue Service (WOPR), a Polish nationwide association specialised in water rescue, participated in this study. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to one of two groups: a feedback group and a non-feedback group. Participants swim a distance of 25 m in the pool, and then they were asked to haul a manikin for the second 25 m, simulating rescuing a drowning victim. Once participants finished the second 25-m distance, participants were asked to initiate 2-min basic life support according to the randomisation.

Results: The median quality of CPR score for the 2-min CPR session without feedback was 69 (33–77) compared to 84 (55–93) in the feedback group (p < 0.001). Compression score, mean depth, rate of adequate chest compressions/min, and overall mean rate during the CPR session improved significantly in the feedback group, compared to the non-feedback group.

Conclusions: Using the visual real-time feedback device significantly improved quality of CPR in our relatively unexperienced CPR providers. Better quality of bystander CPR is essential for clinical outcomes, and therefore feedback devices should be considered. Further clinical studies are needed to assess the effect of real-time visual devices, especially in bystander-CPR.

Get Citation

Keywords

chest compression, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, quality, drowning, lifeguard

About this article
Title

The impact of the use of a CPRMeter monitor on quality of chest compressions: a prospective randomised trial, cross-simulation

Journal

Kardiologia Polska (Polish Heart Journal)

Issue

Vol 76, No 3 (2018)

Pages

574-579

Published online

2017-12-15

DOI

10.5603/KP.a2017.0255

Pubmed

29297195

Bibliographic record

Kardiol Pol 2018;76(3):574-579.

Keywords

chest compression
cardiopulmonary resuscitation
quality
drowning
lifeguard

Authors

Lukasz Iskrzycki
Jacek Smereka
Antonio Rodriguez-Nunez
Roberto Barcala Furelos
Cristian Abelarias Gomez
Halla Kaminska
Wojciech Wieczorek
Lukasz Szarpak
Klaudiusz Nadolny
Robert Galazkowski
Kurt Ruetzler
Jerzy Robert Ladny

References (25)
  1. Perkins GD, Handley AJ, Koster RW, et al. Adult basic life support and automated external defibrillation section Collaborators. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2015: Section 2. Adult basic life support and automated external defibrillation. Resuscitation. 2015; 95: 81–99.
  2. Piegeler T, Thoeni N, Kaserer A, et al. Sex and Age Aspects in Patients Suffering From Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Retrospective Analysis of 760 Consecutive Patients. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016; 95(18): e3561.
  3. Wu Z, Panczyk M, Spaite DW, et al. Telephone cardiopulmonary resuscitation is independently associated with improved survival and improved functional outcome after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2018; 122: 135–140.
  4. Abelairas-Gómez C, Barcala-Furelos R, Szarpak Ł, et al. The effect of strength training on quality of prolonged basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Kardiol Pol. 2017; 75(1): 21–27.
  5. Smereka J, Kasiński M, Smereka A, et al. The quality of a newly developed infant chest compression method applied by paramedics: a randomised crossover manikin trial. Kardiol Pol. 2017; 75(6): 589–595.
  6. Wissenberg M, Lippert FK, Folke F, et al. Association of national initiatives to improve cardiac arrest management with rates of bystander intervention and patient survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. JAMA. 2013; 310(13): 1377–1384.
  7. Szpilman D, Webber J, Quan L, et al. Creating a drowning chain of survival. Resuscitation. 2014; 85(9): 1149–1152.
  8. Sutton RM, Wolfe H, Nishisaki A, et al. Pushing harder, pushing faster, minimizing interruptions… but falling short of 2010 cardiopulmonary resuscitation targets during in-hospital pediatric and adolescent resuscitation. Resuscitation. 2013; 84(12): 1680–1684.
  9. Kirkbright S, Finn J, Tohira H, et al. Audiovisual feedback device use by health care professionals during CPR: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised trials. Resuscitation. 2014; 85(4): 460–471.
  10. Kurowski A, Szarpak Ł, Bogdański Ł, et al. Comparison of the effectiveness of cardiopulmonary resuscitation with standard manual chest compressions and the use of TrueCPR and PocketCPR feedback devices. Kardiol Pol. 2015; 73(10): 924–930.
  11. Buléon C, Delaunay J, Parienti JJ, et al. Impact of a feedback device on chest compression quality during extended manikin CPR: a randomized crossover study. Am J Emerg Med. 2016; 34(9): 1754–1760.
  12. Buléon C, Parienti JJ, Halbout L, et al. Improvement in chest compression quality using a feedback device (CPRmeter): a simulation randomized crossover study. Am J Emerg Med. 2013; 31(10): 1457–1461.
  13. Truszewski Z, Szarpak L, Kurowski A, et al. Randomized trial of the chest compressions effectiveness comparing 3 feedback CPR devices and standard basic life support by nurses. Am J Emerg Med. 2016; 34(3): 381–385.
  14. Ruetzler K, Gruber C, Nabecker S, et al. Hands-off time during insertion of six airway devices during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a randomised manikin trial. Resuscitation. 2011; 82(8): 1060–1063.
  15. Schuerner P, Grande B, Piegeler T, et al. Hands-Off Time for Endotracheal Intubation during CPR Is Not Altered by the Use of the C-MAC Video-Laryngoscope Compared to Conventional Direct Laryngoscopy. A Randomized Crossover Manikin Study. PLoS One. 2016; 11(5): e0155997.
  16. Gruber C, Nabecker S, Wohlfarth P, et al. Evaluation of airway management associated hands-off time during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a randomised manikin follow-up study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013; 21: 10.
  17. Zapletal B, Greif R, Stumpf D, et al. Comparing three CPR feedback devices and standard BLS in a single rescuer scenario: a randomised simulation study. Resuscitation. 2014; 85(4): 560–566.
  18. Fischer H, Gruber J, Neuhold S, et al. Effects and limitations of an AED with audiovisual feedback for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a randomized manikin study. Resuscitation. 2011; 82(7): 902–907.
  19. Skorning M, Beckers SK, Brokmann JCh, et al. New visual feedback device improves performance of chest compressions by professionals in simulated cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2010; 81(1): 53–58.
  20. Abella BS, Edelson DP, Kim S, et al. CPR quality improvement during in-hospital cardiac arrest using a real-time audiovisual feedback system. Resuscitation. 2007; 73(1): 54–61.
  21. Greif R, Stumpf D, Neuhold S, et al. Effective compression ratio--a new measurement of the quality of thorax compression during CPR. Resuscitation. 2013; 84(5): 672–677.
  22. Sutton RM, Niles D, Nysaether J, et al. Quantitative analysis of CPR quality during in-hospital resuscitation of older children and adolescents. Pediatrics. 2009; 124(2): 494–499.
  23. Sutton RM, Niles D, French B, et al. First quantitative analysis of cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality during in-hospital cardiac arrests of young children. Resuscitation. 2014; 85(1): 70–74.
  24. Hsieh TC, Wolfe H, Sutton R, et al. A comparison of video review and feedback device measurement of chest compressions quality during pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation. 2015; 93: 35–39.
  25. Pavo N, Goliasch G, Nierscher FJ, et al. Short structured feedback training is equivalent to a mechanical feedback device in two-rescuer BLS: a randomised simulation study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2016; 24: 70.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., Świętokrzyska 73 street, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl