These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Dispatcher-assisted compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation provides best quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation by laypersons: A randomised controlled single-blinded manikin trial.
    Author: Spelten O, Warnecke T, Wetsch WA, Schier R, Böttiger BW, Hinkelbein J.
    Journal: Eur J Anaesthesiol; 2016 Aug; 33(8):575-80. PubMed ID: 26908002.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by laypersons is a key determinant of both outcome and survival for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Dispatcher-assisted CPR (telephone-CPR, T-CPR) increases the frequency and correctness of bystander-CPR but results in prolonged time to first chest compressions. However, it remains unclear whether instructions for rescue ventilation and/or chest compressions should be recommended for dispatcher-assisted CPR. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate both principles of T-CPR with respect to CPR quality. DESIGN: Randomised controlled single-blinded manikin trial. SETTING: University Hospital of Cologne, Germany, 1 July 2012 to 30 September 2012. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty laypersons between 18 and 65 years. Medically educated individuals, medical professionals and pregnant women were excluded. Participants were asked to resuscitate a manikin and were randomised into three groups: not dispatcher-assisted (uninstructed) CPR (group 1; U-CPR; n = 20), dispatcher-assisted compression-only CPR (group 2; DACO-CPR; n = 19) and full dispatcher-assisted CPR with rescue ventilation (group 3; DAF-CPR; n = 19). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Specific parameters of CPR quality [i.e. no-flow-time (NFT) as well as compression and ventilation parameters] were analysed. To compare different groups we used Student's t test and P less than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Initial NFT was lowest in the DACO-CPR group (mean 21.3 ± 14.4%), followed by dispatcher-assisted full CPR (mean 49.1 ± 8.5%) and by unassisted CPR (mean 55.0 ± 12.9%). Initial NFT covering the time of instruction was lower in DACO-CPR (12.1 ± 5.4%) as compared to dispatcher-assisted full CPR (20.7 ± 8.1%). Compression depth was similar in all three groups: 40.6 ± 13.0 mm (unassisted CPR), 41.0 ± 12.2 mm (DACO-CPR) and 38.8 ± 15.8 mm (dispatcher-assisted full CPR). Average compression frequency was highest in the DACO-CPR group (65.2 ± 22.4 min) compared with the unassisted CPR group (35.6 ± 24.2 min) and the dispatcher-assisted full CPR group (44.5 ± 10.8 min). Correct rescue ventilation was given in 3.1 ± 11.1% (unassisted CPR) and 1.6 ± 16.1% (dispatcher-assisted full CPR) of all ventilation attempts. CONCLUSION: Best quality of CPR was achieved by DACO-CPR because of superior compression frequencies and reduced NFT. In contrast, the full dispatcher-assisted CPR with a longer initial instructing phase (initial NFT) did not result in enhanced CPR quality or an optimised compression depth.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]