Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of Turku, Kiinamyllynkatu 10, 20520 Turku, Finland.
Department of Nursing Science, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2024 Jan 12;23(1):11-20. doi: 10.1093/eurjcn/zvad041.
Individual studies that investigated the effect of standalone audio-visual feedback (AVF) devices during laypersons' cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training have yielded conflicting results. This review aimed to evaluate the effect of standalone AVF devices on the quality of chest compressions during laypersons' CPR training.
Randomized controlled trials of simulation studies recruiting participants without actual patient CPR experience were included. The intervention evaluated was the quality of chest compressions with standalone AVF devices vs. without AVF devices. Databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane Central, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science, and PsycINFO, were searched from January 2010 to January 2022. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A meta-analysis alongside a narrative synthesis was used for examining the effect of standalone AVF devices.Sixteen studies were selected for this systematic review. A meta-analysis revealed an increased compression depth of 2.22 mm [95% CI (Confidence Interval), 0.88-3.55, P = 0.001] when participants performed CPR using the feedback devices. Besides, AVF devices enabled laypersons to deliver compression rates closer to the recommended range of 100-120 per min. No improvement was noted in chest recoil and hand positioning when participants used standalone AVF devices.
The quality of the included studies was variable, and different standalone AVF devices were used. Standalone AVF devices were instrumental in guiding laypersons to deliver deeper compressions without compromising the quality of compression rates. However, the devices did not improve the quality of chest recoil and placement of the hands.
PROSPERO: CRD42020205754.
个别研究调查了在非专业人员进行心肺复苏（CPR）培训期间使用独立视听反馈（AVF）设备的效果，结果相互矛盾。本综述旨在评估独立 AVF 设备对非专业人员 CPR 培训期间胸外按压质量的影响。
纳入了招募无实际患者 CPR 经验的模拟研究的随机对照试验。评估的干预措施是使用独立 AVF 设备与不使用 AVF 设备进行胸外按压的质量。从 2010 年 1 月至 2022 年 1 月，检索了 PubMed、Cochrane 中央、Embase、护理学及相关健康文献累积索引（CINAHL）、Web of Science 和 PsycINFO 等数据库。使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具评估偏倚风险。采用 meta 分析和叙述性综合方法来检查独立 AVF 设备的效果。本系统评价共纳入了 16 项研究。meta 分析显示，使用反馈设备进行 CPR 时，按压深度增加了 2.22 毫米[95%置信区间（CI），0.88-3.55，P = 0.001]。此外，AVF 设备使非专业人员能够将按压频率更接近推荐的 100-120 次/分钟的范围。当参与者使用独立的 AVF 设备时，胸部回弹和手部位置没有得到改善。
纳入研究的质量各不相同，并且使用了不同的独立 AVF 设备。独立的 AVF 设备有助于指导非专业人员进行更深层次的按压，而不会影响按压频率的质量。然而，这些设备并没有提高胸部回弹和手部位置的质量。
PROSPERO：CRD42020205754。
