EPR: Effectiveness of Pediatric Resuscitation

• Sponsor: International Institute of Rescue Research and Education (Other)
• Overall Status: Unknown status
• CT.gov ID: NCT02283034
• Collaborator: (none)
• Enrollment: 120
• Location: 1
• Arms: 2
• Duration (Months): 1
• Patients Per Site Per Month: 117.8

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

The aim of this study was to compare five CPR feedback devices to standard BLS in terms of the quality of single rescuer pediatric resuscitation. Therefore, the investigators hypothesis was that there would be no difference between CPR methods in terms of chest compression quality parameters.

Condition or Disease	Intervention/Treatment	Phase
Cardiac Arrest	Device: The CPRmeter; Device: The PocketCPR; Device: Standard BLS; Device: The CPREazy; Device: The CPR PRO APP; Device: The CardioPump; Device: Standard BLS	N/A

Detailed Description

Cardiac arrest is a leading cause of death worldwide. High-quality chest compressions are of paramount importance for survival and good neurological outcome. Unfortunately, even health professionals have difficulty performing effective CPR. Chest compression (CC) is often too shallow, compression ratio is inadequate, and hands-off time is too long. CPR feedback devices might be an option for rescuers to in order to increase CC efficiency.

Study Design

• Study Type: Interventional
• Anticipated Enrollment: 120 participants
• Allocation: Randomized
• Intervention Model: Crossover Assignment
• Masking: Single (Participant)
• Primary Purpose: Treatment
• Official Title: Quality of Chest Compressions During 8 Min of Single-rescuer Pediatric Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation With Five Different CPR Feedback Devices. Randomised Crossover Manikin Trial
• Study Start Date: Oct 1, 2014
• Anticipated Primary Completion Date: Nov 1, 2014
• Anticipated Study Completion Date: Nov 1, 2014

Arms and Interventions

Arm	Intervention/Treatment
Experimental: With feedback Participants compress the chest of the manikin with CPR feedback device.	Device: Standard BLS; Chest compressions without CPR feedback device (manual resuscitation)
Experimental: Without feedback Participants compress the chest of the manikin without CPR feedback device	Device: The CPRmeter; Feedback device - 1; Device: The PocketCPR; Feedback device - 2; Device: Standard BLS; Standard basic life support = chest compressions without any feedback device (manual resuscitation); Device: The CPREazy; Feedback device - 3; Device: The CPR PRO APP; Feedback device - 4; Device: The CardioPump; Feedback devices - 5

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

1. Effective compressions was defined as compression with correct depth (40-50mm), correct hand position and complete decompressions [1 month]

   effective compressions was defined as compression with correct depth (40-50mm), correct hand position and complete decompressions

Secondary Outcome Measures

1. Chest compression depth [1 month]

   To measure chest compression depth during 8 minutes. Chest compression depth will be measured using the software connected to the manikin and computer

2. Chest compression rate [1 month]

   To measure the chest compression rate during 8 minutes. Chest compression rate will be measured using the software connected to the manikin and computer

3. effective compressions ratio was defined as effective compressions [%] multiplied by flow time [%] [1 month]

   effective compressions ratio was defined as effective compressions [%] multiplied by flow time [%]

4. Flow time was defined as the sum of all periods during which chest compressions were performed [1 month]

   flow time was defined as the sum of all periods during which chest compressions were performed.

5. absolute hands-off time was defined as the sum of all periods without chest compressions or ventilation [1 month]

   absolute hands-off time (HOT) was defined as the sum of all periods without chest compressions or ventilation

6. VAS (visual analogue scale) [1 month]

   after having completed the 8 min testing period, the study participants were asked how challenging they had experienced standard BLS or resuscitation which the respective feedback device. answers were rated on a 10-point Lickert scale (most difficult = 1 to easiest = 10)

7. Prefered CPR device [1 month]

   after having completed the 8 min testing period, the study participants were asked how chellenging whitch method they would preferred. answers were rated on a 10-point Lickert scale (lower preferred = 1 to most preferred = 10)

Eligibility Criteria

Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 Years to 65 Years
• Sexes Eligible for Study: All
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Inclusion Criteria:

• give voluntary consent to participate in the study

• medical profession (paramedics, nurses, physicians) or medical students (nurses, paramedics, physicians)

Exclusion Criteria:

• not meet the above criteria

• wrist or low back diseases

Contacts and Locations

Locations

	Site	City	State	Country	Postal Code
1	International Institute of Rescue Research and Education	Warsaw	Masovia	Poland	03-122

Sponsors and Collaborators

• International Institute of Rescue Research and Education

Investigators

• Principal Investigator: Andrzej Kurowski, Institute of Cardiology
• Principal Investigator: Lukasz Szarpak, Institute of Cardiology

Study Documents (Full-Text)

None provided.

More Information

Publications

None provided.

• Responsible Party: Lukasz Szarpak, Lukasz Szarpak, Institute of Cardiology, Warsaw, Poland
• ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02283034
• Other Study ID Numbers: CPR/2014/06
• First Posted: Nov 5, 2014
• Last Update Posted: Nov 5, 2014
• Last Verified: Nov 1, 2014

• Additional relevant MeSH terms: Heart Arrest

Study Results

No Results Posted as of Nov 5, 2014