Search

Background: The World Health Organization's endorsement of the "Kids save lives" statement fosters the implementation of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training for school children worldwide. However, not every child achieves and maintains the recommended chest compression depth of 5-6cm., Purpose: To investigate the variability in compression depth for three age groups (grade 1: 12-14; grade 2: 14-16; grade 3: 16-18 years) as a function of physical characteristics and to define minimal compression excellence levels for training., Methods: Compression depth of 265 subjects (111 girls, 154 boys) aged 12-18 years from one secondary school was individually assessed and reported in percentiles per age group. Pearson correlations between physical characteristics and CPR variables were calculated. Excellence level was defined as the percentage compressions with depth 5-6cm., Results: In grade 1 (12-14 years), achieved excellence levels were 1% for girls and 23% for boys at the 75th percentile. In grade 2 (14-16 years), it increased to 24% for girls and 80% for boys. In grade 3 (16-18 years) finally, it was 59% for girls and 87% for boys. Significant positive correlations were found between CPR and physical variables (p<0.05), especially weight >50kg (p<0.01)., Conclusion: A minimal excellence level of 25% is achievable by boys 12-14year and girls 14-16year and can be gradually improved to 60% and 90% according to age and gender. This might necessitate more exertion and training for some younger children, especially girls, and will probably be more easily achieved for children weighing >50kg., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Feedback is vital for the effective delivery of skills-based education. We sought to compare the sandwich technique and learning conversation structured methods of feedback delivery in competency-based basic life support (BLS) training., Methods: Open randomised crossover study undertaken between October 2014 and March 2015 at the University of Birmingham, United Kingdom. Six-hundred and forty healthcare students undertaking a European Resuscitation Council (ERC) BLS course were enrolled, each of whom was randomised to receive teaching using either the sandwich technique or the learning conversation. Fifty-eight instructors were randomised to initially teach using either the learning conversation or sandwich technique, prior to crossing-over and teaching with the alternative technique after a pre-defined time period. Outcome measures included skill acquisition as measured by an end-of-course competency assessment, instructors' perception of teaching with each feedback technique and candidates' perception of the feedback they were provided with., Results: Scores assigned to use of the learning conversation by instructors were significantly more favourable than for the sandwich technique across all but two assessed domains relating to instructor perception of the feedback technique, including all skills-based domains. No difference was seen in either assessment pass rates (80.9% sandwich technique vs. 77.2% learning conversation; OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.85-1.84; p=0.29) or any domain relating to candidates' perception of their teaching technique., Conclusions & Relevance: This is the first direct comparison of two feedback techniques in clinical medical education using both quantitative and qualitative methodology. The learning conversation is preferred by instructors providing competency-based life support training and is perceived to favour skills acquisition., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Assessment skills are often neglected in resuscitation training and it has been shown that the ERC BLS/AED instructor course may be insufficient to prepare candidates for an assessment role. We have introduced an Assessment Training Programme (ATP) to improve assessors' decision making. In this article we present our ATP and an observational study of candidates' confidence levels upon completing both an ERC BLS/AED instructor course and our ATP., Methods: Forty-seven candidates undertook the ERC instructor course and 20 qualified ERC BLS/AED instructors undertook the ATP. Pre- and post-course questionnaires were completed. Confidence was assessed on ten-point Visual Analogue Scales (VAS)., Results: Overall confidence on the ERC BLS/AED instructor course rose from 5.9 (SD 1.8) to 8.7 (SD 1.4) (P < 0.001). A more modest improvement was witnessed on the ATP, rising from 8.2 (SD 1.4) to 9.6 (SD 0.5) (P < 0.001). Upon completion of their respective courses, assessors (mean 9.6, SD 0.5) were significantly more confident at assessing than instructors (mean 8.7, SD 0.5) (P<0.001). Confidence in assessing individual algorithm components was similar on both courses. On the post-course questionnaire those on the ATP remained significantly more confident at assessing borderline candidates compared to instructors (P < 0.001), with no difference for clear pass (P = 0.067) or clear fail (P = 0.060) candidates., Conclusion: The ATP raises the confidence of assessing BLS/AED candidates to a level above that of the ERC instructor course alone. We advocate that resuscitation organisations consider integrating an ATP into their existing training structure., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To evaluate the long-term effectiveness of 15-min refresher basic life support (BLS) training following 45-min chest compression-only BLS training., Methods: After the 45-min chest compression-only BLS training, the participants were randomly assigned to either the refresher BLS training group, which received a 15-min refresher training 6 months after the initial training (refresher training group), or to the control group, which did not receive refresher training. Participants' resuscitation skills were evaluated by a 2-min case-based scenario test 1 year after the initial training. The primary outcome measure was the number of appropriate chest compressions during a 2-min test period., Results: 140 participants were enrolled and 112 of them completed this study. The number of appropriate chest compressions performed during the 2-min test period was significantly greater in the refresher training group (68.9±72.3) than in the control group (36.3±50.8, p=0.009). Time without chest compressions was significantly shorter in the refresher training group (16.1±2.1 s versus 26.9±3.7 s, p<0.001). There were no significant differences in time to chest compression (29.6±16.7 s versus 34.4±17.8 s, p=0.172) and AED use between the groups., Conclusions: A short-time refresher BLS training program 6 months after the initial training can help trainees retain chest compression skills for up to 1 year. Repeated BLS training, even if very short, would be adopted to keep acquired CPR quality optimal (UMIN-CTR UMIN 000004101)., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Efficiently performed basic life support (BLS) after cardiac arrest is proven to be effective. However, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is strenuous and rescuers' performance declines rapidly over time. Audio-visual feedback devices reporting CPR quality may prevent this decline. We aimed to investigate the effect of various CPR feedback devices on CPR quality., Methods: In this open, prospective, randomised, controlled trial we compared three CPR feedback devices (PocketCPR, CPRmeter, iPhone app PocketCPR) with standard BLS without feedback in a simulated scenario. 240 trained medical students performed single rescuer BLS on a manikin for 8min. Effective compression (compressions with correct depth, pressure point and sufficient decompression) as well as compression rate, flow time fraction and ventilation parameters were compared between the four groups., Results: Study participants using the PocketCPR performed 17±19% effective compressions compared to 32±28% with CPRmeter, 25±27% with the iPhone app PocketCPR, and 35±30% applying standard BLS (PocketCPR vs. CPRmeter p=0.007, PocketCPR vs. standard BLS p=0.001, others: ns). PocketCPR and CPRmeter prevented a decline in effective compression over time, but overall performance in the PocketCPR group was considerably inferior to standard BLS. Compression depth and rate were within the range recommended in the guidelines in all groups., Conclusion: While we found differences between the investigated CPR feedback devices, overall BLS quality was suboptimal in all groups. Surprisingly, effective compression was not improved by any CPR feedback device compared to standard BLS. All feedback devices caused substantial delay in starting CPR, which may worsen outcome., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)