A Cluster-Randomized Control Study Comparing a New Cue “Two Compressions per Second” with “100–120 Compressions per Minute” in Training of Bystander Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
{"title":"A Cluster-Randomized Control Study Comparing a New Cue “Two Compressions per Second” with “100–120 Compressions per Minute” in Training of Bystander Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jemermed.2024.07.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Chest compression at a rate of 100–120 compressions per minute (cpm) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is associated with the highest survival rates. Performing compressions at a faster rate may exhaust the rescuers.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To compare a new cue of ‘two compressions per second’ to the traditional cue of ‘100–120 compressions per minute’ on compression rate in CPR training.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In this cluster-randomized study, students from two senior high schools were assigned into two groups. For the experimental group, the cue for the compression rate was ‘two compressions per second’. For the control group, the cue was ‘100–120 cpm’. Except the different cues, all participants underwent the same standardized CPR training program. Verbal compression rate-related feedback was not obtained during practice. Quality indicators of chest compressions were recorded by a sensorized manikin. The primary outcome measure was mean compression rate at course conclusion. The secondary outcome measures were individual compression quality indicators at course conclusion and 3 months after training.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We included 164 participants (85 participants, experimental group; 79 participants, control group). Both groups had similar characteristics. The experimental group had a significantly lower mean compression rate at course conclusion (144.3 ± 16.17 vs. 152.7 ± 18.38 cpm, <em>p</em> = 0.003) and at 3 months after training (<em>p</em> = 0.09). The two groups had similar mean percentage of adequate compression rate (≥ 100 cpm), mean compression depth, and mean percentage of complete recoil at course conclusion and 3 months after training.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The new cue of ‘two compressions per second’ resulted in participants having a lower compression rate, although it still exceeded 120 cpm.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16085,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0736467924002294","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Chest compression at a rate of 100–120 compressions per minute (cpm) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is associated with the highest survival rates. Performing compressions at a faster rate may exhaust the rescuers.
Objectives
To compare a new cue of ‘two compressions per second’ to the traditional cue of ‘100–120 compressions per minute’ on compression rate in CPR training.
Methods
In this cluster-randomized study, students from two senior high schools were assigned into two groups. For the experimental group, the cue for the compression rate was ‘two compressions per second’. For the control group, the cue was ‘100–120 cpm’. Except the different cues, all participants underwent the same standardized CPR training program. Verbal compression rate-related feedback was not obtained during practice. Quality indicators of chest compressions were recorded by a sensorized manikin. The primary outcome measure was mean compression rate at course conclusion. The secondary outcome measures were individual compression quality indicators at course conclusion and 3 months after training.
Results
We included 164 participants (85 participants, experimental group; 79 participants, control group). Both groups had similar characteristics. The experimental group had a significantly lower mean compression rate at course conclusion (144.3 ± 16.17 vs. 152.7 ± 18.38 cpm, p = 0.003) and at 3 months after training (p = 0.09). The two groups had similar mean percentage of adequate compression rate (≥ 100 cpm), mean compression depth, and mean percentage of complete recoil at course conclusion and 3 months after training.
Conclusion
The new cue of ‘two compressions per second’ resulted in participants having a lower compression rate, although it still exceeded 120 cpm.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Emergency Medicine is an international, peer-reviewed publication featuring original contributions of interest to both the academic and practicing emergency physician. JEM, published monthly, contains research papers and clinical studies as well as articles focusing on the training of emergency physicians and on the practice of emergency medicine. The Journal features the following sections:
• Original Contributions
• Clinical Communications: Pediatric, Adult, OB/GYN
• Selected Topics: Toxicology, Prehospital Care, The Difficult Airway, Aeromedical Emergencies, Disaster Medicine, Cardiology Commentary, Emergency Radiology, Critical Care, Sports Medicine, Wound Care
• Techniques and Procedures
• Technical Tips
• Clinical Laboratory in Emergency Medicine
• Pharmacology in Emergency Medicine
• Case Presentations of the Harvard Emergency Medicine Residency
• Visual Diagnosis in Emergency Medicine
• Medical Classics
• Emergency Forum
• Editorial(s)
• Letters to the Editor
• Education
• Administration of Emergency Medicine
• International Emergency Medicine
• Computers in Emergency Medicine
• Violence: Recognition, Management, and Prevention
• Ethics
• Humanities and Medicine
• American Academy of Emergency Medicine
• AAEM Medical Student Forum
• Book and Other Media Reviews
• Calendar of Events
• Abstracts
• Trauma Reports
• Ultrasound in Emergency Medicine