Randomized trial of the chest compressions effectiveness comparing 3 feedback cardiopulmonary resuscitation devices and standard basic life support by nurses

• Published in: The American journal of emergency medicine
• Main Authors: Truszewski, Zenon, PhD, MD, Szarpak, Lukasz, PhD, DPH, EMT-P, Kurowski, Andrzej, PhD, MD, Evrin, Togay, PhD, MD, Zasko, Piotr, MD, Bogdanski, Lukasz, MD, Czyzewski, Lukasz, PhD, RN
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 2015
• Subjects: Emergency
• ISSN: 0735-6757
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.11.003

Abstract Background Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a leading cause of mortality and serious neurological morbidity in Europe. We aim to investigate the effect of 3 cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) feedback devices on effectiveness of chest compression during CPR. Methods This was prospective, randomized, crossover, controlled trial. Following a brief didactic session, 140 volunteer nurses inexperienced with feedback CPR devices attempted chest compression on a manikin using 3 CPR feedback devices (TrueCPR, CPR-Ezy, and iCPR) and standard basic life support (BLS) without feedback. Results Comparison of standard BLS, TrueCPR, CPR-Ezy, and iCPR showed differences in the effectiveness of chest compression (compressions with correct pressure point, correct depth, and sufficient decompression), which are, respectively, 37.5%, 85.6%, 39.5%, and 33.4%; compression depth (44.6 vs 54.5 vs 45.6 vs 39.6 mm); and compression rate (129.4 vs 110.2 vs 101.5 vs 103.5 min − 1 ). Conclusions During the simulated resuscitation scenario, only TrueCPR significantly affected the increased effectiveness compression compared with standard BLS, CPR-Ezy, and iCPR. Further studies are required to confirm the results in clinical practice.