The impact of real-time feedback on ventilation quality during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A before-and-after study.

INTRODUCTION

Ventilations are a critical component of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). There is conflicting evidence, however, on the most appropriate method of ventilation during cardiac arrest management. Recent evidence has suggested that regardless of the optimal ventilation strategy, ventilations are often not delivered compliant with guideline recommendations. Recent technological advancements have allowed for accurate measurement and real-time feedback of ventilation rate and volume during resuscitation. Simulation studies have found significant improvements in ventilations with the use of real-time feedback during simulated cardiac arrest. The use of feedback has not been studied in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to determine whether the use of real-time feedback improves compliance with pre-defined targets for ventilation rate and volume during out-of-hospital cardiac resuscitation.

METHODS

This was a before-and-after study with four paramedic services in Ontario, Canada. We enrolled adult, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients where the ZOLL Accuvent® device was utilized to measure ventilation rate and volume. In the before phase (without feedback), the Accuvent® was used to measure ventilations, however, providers were blinded to the real-time feedback. In the after phase (with feedback), the feedback dashboard was activated and providers used the real-time feedback to guide their ventilations. All other aspects of resuscitation remained consistent throughout the study. The main objective of the study was to compare the proportion of each case that was compliant with pre-defined ventilation targets with real-time feedback and without real-time feedback. We also examined the use of advanced airways on ventilation quality and examined for associations between ventilation parameters and return of circulation.

RESULTS

We enrolled 412 patients in the study (191 in the before phase without feedback and 221 in the after phase with feedback). Overall, we found significant improvements in both ventilation rate and volume in the after phase (with real-time feedback) compared to the before phase (without real-time feedback). We did not find any differences in ventilation compliance with or without advanced airways, or intra-arrest or post-cardiac arrest.

CONCLUSION

The use of real-time feedback was associated with an increased proportion of ventilations that were compliant with pre-defined targets during cardiac resuscitation. Further work is required to improve the use of real-time ventilation feedback, and to determine the impact of ventilations on patient outcomes.