Wingen Sabine, Großfeld Nele, Adams Niels-Benjamin, Streit Antonia, Stock Jan, Böttiger Bernd W, Wetsch Wolfgang A
University of Cologne, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Cologne, Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937 Cologne, Germany.
German Resuscitation Council, Prittwitzstraße 43, 89070 Ulm, Germany.
Resusc Plus. 2024 Apr 17;18:100631. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100631. eCollection 2024 Jun.
App-linked real-time feedback-devices for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) aim to improve laypersons' resuscitation quality. Resuscitation guidelines recommend these technologies in training settings. This is the first study comparing resuscitation quality of all App-linked feedback-devices currently on market.
A prospective randomised simulation study was performed. After standardised instructions, participants performed 2-minutes compression-only CPR on a manikin without feedback (baseline). Afterwards, participants performed 4 × 2 min CPR with four different feedback devices in randomised order (CorPatch® Trainer, CPRBAND AIO Training, SimCPR®ProTrainer, Relay Response™) (intervention). CPR metrics (chest compression depth (CD), chest compression rate (CR), percentage of correct CD/CR (%), correct hand position, correct chest recoil, and technical preparation-time) were assessed. Devices data were compared to the baseline group using Wilcoxon testing with IBM SPSS (primary outcome). Differences between devices were analysed with ANOVA testing (secondary outcome). Normally distributed data were described as mean ± standard deviation (SD) and non-normally distributed data as Median [Interquartile range (IQR). CPR self-confidence was measured by means of questionnaire before and after feedback devices' use. Comparison was performed by students -test.
Forty participants were involved. SimCPR®ProTrainer was the only device, which resulted in guideline-compliant chest compressions (Mean ± SD:5.37 ± 0.76) with improved chest compression depth ( < 0.001), and percentage of correct chest compression depth ( < 0.001) compared to unassisted CPR (baseline). CorPatch® Trainer as the only device with audio-visual recoil instructions resulted in improved chest recoil (Mean ± SD:72.25 ± 24.89) compared to baseline (Mean ± SD:49.00 ± 42.20; < 0.01), while the other three devices resulted in significantly lower chest recoil rates (CPRBAND AIO Training: 37.03 ± 39.90; < 0.01, SimCPR®ProTrainer: Mean ± SD:39.88 ± 36.50; = 0.03, Relay Response™: Mean ± SD:36.88 ± 37.73; = 0.02). CPR quality when using the different feedback devices differ in chest compression depth ( = 0.02), chest compression rate ( < 0.001), percentage of correct chest compression depth/rate ( = 0.03/ = 0.04), and technical preparation-time ( < 0.001). Feedback-devices' use increased participant's CPR self-confidence ( < 0.001).
Although, CPR feedback devices show improved CPR performance in layperson in some metrics, none of the tested CPR feedback devices supported layperson in overall adequate CPR performance. More and better technical functionality is necessary, to fully utilise the potential of CPR feedback devices and to prevent a worsening of CPR performance when layperson use this technology.
用于心肺复苏（CPR）的应用程序连接的实时反馈设备旨在提高非专业人员的复苏质量。复苏指南在培训环境中推荐这些技术。这是第一项比较当前市场上所有应用程序连接的反馈设备的复苏质量的研究。
进行了一项前瞻性随机模拟研究。在标准化指导后，参与者在没有反馈的人体模型上进行2分钟的仅按压式心肺复苏（基线）。之后，参与者以随机顺序使用四种不同的反馈设备进行4×2分钟的心肺复苏（CorPatch®Trainer、CPRBAND AIO Training、SimCPR®ProTrainer、Relay Response™）（干预）。评估了心肺复苏指标（胸部按压深度（CD）、胸部按压速率（CR）、正确的CD/CR百分比（%）、正确的手部位置、正确的胸部回弹以及技术准备时间）。使用IBM SPSS通过Wilcoxon检验将设备数据与基线组进行比较（主要结果）。使用方差分析检验分析设备之间的差异（次要结果）。正态分布的数据描述为平均值±标准差（SD），非正态分布的数据描述为中位数[四分位间距（IQR）]。在使用反馈设备之前和之后，通过问卷测量心肺复苏自信心。通过学生t检验进行比较。
40名参与者参与。SimCPR®ProTrainer是唯一一种能产生符合指南的胸部按压（平均值±标准差：5.37±0.76）的设备，与无辅助的心肺复苏（基线）相比，胸部按压深度有所改善（<0.001），正确的胸部按压深度百分比也有所改善（<0.001）。CorPatch®Trainer是唯一一种带有视听回弹指示的设备，与基线相比，胸部回弹有所改善（平均值±标准差：72.25±24.89）（平均值±标准差：49.00±42.20；<0.01），而其他三种设备的胸部回弹率明显较低（CPRBAND AIO Training：37.03±39.90；<0.01，SimCPR®ProTrainer：平均值±标准差：39.88±36.50；=0.03，Relay Response™：平均值±标准差：36.88±37.73；=0.02）。使用不同反馈设备时的心肺复苏质量在胸部按压深度（=0.02）、胸部按压速率（<0.001）、正确的胸部按压深度/速率百分比（=0.03/=0.04）以及技术准备时间（<0.
