A Simulation Trial of Traditional Dispatcher-Assisted CPR Versus Compressions—Only Dispatcher-Assisted CPR
- 1 January 2006
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Prehospital Emergency Care
- Vol. 10 (2) , 247-253
- https://doi.org/10.1080/10903120500541027
Abstract
Growing evidence indicates that it may not be essential to deliver ventilations in the first few minutes of CPR. We compared time to delivery of first compression in traditional CPR with ventilations and compressions to compression-only CPR performed by untrained laypersons assisted by a mock 911 dispatcher. This randomized-controlled simulation study included a convenience sample of English-speaking emergency department visitors during a 6-month period. Exclusion criteria were prior CPR training or physical incapacity. A cardiac arrest scenario was presented to subjects who were then provided with one of two sets of telephone CPR instructions by a mock 911 dispatcher. One group received traditional CPR instructions (TCPR) and the second group received compression only CPR instructions (COCPR). Subjects performed CPR on a Laerdal Resusci-Anne CPR manikin and recording strips were analyzed for frequency and quality measures. Pre-and post-test questionnaires assessed subject fatigue and telephone instruction understanding. The primary outcome was the time interval from 911 call to initiation of chest compressions. Analysis included Student t-test, Chi-square, and Wilcoxon Rank Sum. Of 377 potential subjects, 54 consented to randomization. The data from 50 subjects were analyzed. Compared to group TCPR, group COCPR initiated chest compressions faster (72 vs 117 sec, p < 0.0001), completed four cycles of CPR faster (168 vs. 250 sec, p < 0.0001), and paused for a smaller percentage of the resuscitation (13% vs. 36%, p < 0.0001). Only 9% of ventilation opportunities in the TCPR group yielded ventilations of the correct volume. There were no differences between groups in perceived understanding of CPR instruction or fatigue. We have identified the potential timesavings that may occur during compressions-only CPR. Bystander resuscitation may be more efficient when ventilations are excluded from the CPR sequence.Keywords
This publication has 32 references indexed in Scilit:
- Evaluating the quality of prehospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation by reviewing automated external defibrillator records and survival for out-of-hospital witnessed arrestsResuscitation, 2005
- Hyperventilation-Induced Hypotension During Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationCirculation, 2004
- Health-Related Quality of Life Is Better for Cardiac Arrest Survivors Who Received Citizen Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationCirculation, 2003
- Importance of Continuous Chest Compressions During Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationCirculation, 2002
- Modifiable Factors Associated With Improved Cardiac Arrest Survival in a Multicenter Basic Life Support/Defibrillation System: OPALS Study Phase I ResultsAnnals of Emergency Medicine, 1999
- The Need for Ventilatory Support During Bystander CPRAnnals of Emergency Medicine, 1995
- Quality of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation influences outcome after prehospital cardiac arrestResuscitation, 1994
- Sternal Force-Displacement Relationship During Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationJournal of Biomechanical Engineering, 1993
- Dispatcher-assisted telephone CPR: Common delays and time standards for deliveryAnnals of Emergency Medicine, 1991
- Elastic properties of the human chest during cardiopulmonary resuscitationCritical Care Medicine, 1983