Influence of rescuer position and arm angle on chest compression quality: An international multicentric randomized crossover simulation trial

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Resuscitation plus Pub Date : 2024-10-29 DOI:10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100815
Abel Nicolau , Ingrid Bispo , Marc Lazarovici , Christoffer Ericsson , Pedro Sa-Couto , Inês Jorge , Pedro Vieira-Marques , Carla Sa-Couto
{"title":"Influence of rescuer position and arm angle on chest compression quality: An international multicentric randomized crossover simulation trial","authors":"Abel Nicolau ,&nbsp;Ingrid Bispo ,&nbsp;Marc Lazarovici ,&nbsp;Christoffer Ericsson ,&nbsp;Pedro Sa-Couto ,&nbsp;Inês Jorge ,&nbsp;Pedro Vieira-Marques ,&nbsp;Carla Sa-Couto","doi":"10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Success in resuscitation depends not only on the timeliness of the maneuvers but also on the quality of chest compressions. Factors such as the rescuer position and arm angle can significantly impact compression quality.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This study explores the influence of rescuer positioning and arm angle on the quality of chest compressions among healthcare professionals experienced in cardiopulmonary resuscitation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In this international, multicentric, randomized crossover simulation trial with independent groups, healthcare professionals were assigned to one of four positions: kneeling on the floor, standing, standing on a step stool, and kneeling on the bed. Participants performed two 3-minute trials of uninterrupted chest compressions at arm angles of 90° and 105°. Compression quality was assessed, using manikin derived data.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 76 participants entered the study. Those using a 90° arm angle exhibited higher compression scores than those at a 105° angle. Rescuers standing on a step stool maintained higher scores over time when compared to other groups. In contrast, rescuers kneeling on the bed consistently scored below 75% throughout the trial, with particularly low scores at the 105° angle.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Rescuer position and arm angle significantly influence CPR quality, with a 90° arm angle and elevated positioning optimizing compression depth and effectiveness. The results recommend against kneeling on the bed due to its negative impact on chest compression quality.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":94192,"journal":{"name":"Resuscitation plus","volume":"20 ","pages":"Article 100815"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resuscitation plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666520424002662","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Success in resuscitation depends not only on the timeliness of the maneuvers but also on the quality of chest compressions. Factors such as the rescuer position and arm angle can significantly impact compression quality.

Aim

This study explores the influence of rescuer positioning and arm angle on the quality of chest compressions among healthcare professionals experienced in cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Methods

In this international, multicentric, randomized crossover simulation trial with independent groups, healthcare professionals were assigned to one of four positions: kneeling on the floor, standing, standing on a step stool, and kneeling on the bed. Participants performed two 3-minute trials of uninterrupted chest compressions at arm angles of 90° and 105°. Compression quality was assessed, using manikin derived data.

Results

A total of 76 participants entered the study. Those using a 90° arm angle exhibited higher compression scores than those at a 105° angle. Rescuers standing on a step stool maintained higher scores over time when compared to other groups. In contrast, rescuers kneeling on the bed consistently scored below 75% throughout the trial, with particularly low scores at the 105° angle.

Conclusion

Rescuer position and arm angle significantly influence CPR quality, with a 90° arm angle and elevated positioning optimizing compression depth and effectiveness. The results recommend against kneeling on the bed due to its negative impact on chest compression quality.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
施救者位置和手臂角度对胸外按压质量的影响:国际多中心随机交叉模拟试验
背景复苏的成功不仅取决于操作的及时性,还取决于胸外按压的质量。方法在这项国际性、多中心、随机交叉模拟试验中,医护人员被分配到四种姿势之一:跪在地上、站立、站在阶梯凳上和跪在床上。参与者以 90° 和 105° 的手臂角度进行了两次 3 分钟的不间断胸外按压试验。使用人体模型得出的数据对按压质量进行了评估。与 105° 角度的参与者相比,90° 角度的参与者的按压得分更高。与其他组别相比,站在阶梯凳上的救援人员随着时间的推移得分更高。相比之下,跪在床上的施救者在整个试验过程中的得分始终低于 75%,尤其是 105° 角的施救者得分更低。结果建议不要跪在床上,因为这会对胸外按压质量产生负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Resuscitation plus
Resuscitation plus Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
52 days
期刊最新文献
Prehospital ventilation strategies in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A protocol for a randomized controlled trial (PIVOT trial) Effect of introduction of a rapid response system and increasing Medical Emergency Team (MET) activity on mortality over a 20-year period in a paediatric specialist hospital Cardiopulmonary resuscitation in obese patients: A scoping review Effect of chest compressions in addition to extracorporeal life support on carotid flow in an experimental model of refractory cardiac arrest in pigs Ventilation practices and preparedness of healthcare providers in term newborn resuscitation: A comprehensive survey study in Austrian hospitals
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1