Efficacy of a five-minute compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation class compared to thirty-minute instruction among college students
Name:
1-s2.0-S2666520420300126-maine ...
Size:
563.8Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Published Version
Affiliation
University of Arizona College of MedicineUniversity of Arizona, Department of Emergency Medicine
Issue Date
2020
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
Elsevier B.V.Citation
Shende, T. C., Battaglia, M. R., Nuno, T., & Beskind, D. (2020). Efficacy of a five-minute compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation class compared to thirty-minute instruction among college students. Resuscitation Plus, 3.Journal
Resuscitation PlusRights
Copyright is held by the author(s) or the publisher. If your intended use exceeds the permitted uses specified by the license, contact the publisher for more information. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Objective: To determine if 5-minute compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCO-CPR) instruction is as effective as 30-minute instruction in improving participant knowledge and comfort with performing CCO-CPR as well as teaching CPR quality and responsiveness to an Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA). Methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial of university undergraduates was performed. Participants were randomized to either a 5-minute (experimental) or 30-minute (control) CCO-CPR instruction class. Pre- and post-testing was performed with a written and simulation test. Measurements collected assessed rate and depth of compressions, time to call 911, and time to start chest compressions. Prior to instruction, subjects’ baseline measurements of CPR performance were evaluated during a standardized sudden death scenario using a Laerdal SkillreporterTM mannequin. The written test and scenario were repeated after either the five or 30 minute CCO-CPR instruction using the same outcome measures. Statistical tests of association for categorical variables were assessed using the chi-square test and the independent samples t-test was utilized for continuous variables. All tests were two-sided and the level of significance was set at α = 0.05. Results: Among the 59 participants, 28 received 5 minutes of instruction and 31 received 30 minutes. Fifteen (25.4%) individuals reported prior CPR training. Post intervention, all measurements reached statistically significant improvements in each group but there was no difference between the two groups improvement in depth of compressions (experimental group: 41.8 mm, 95% CI 36.6–43.4 vs control group: 46.5 mm, 95% CI 40.9–48.3, p = 0.06), compressions per minute (114.3 cpm, 95% CI 105.5–122.0 vs 121.1 cpm, 95% CI 115.1–131.4, p = 0.10), time to starting chest compressions (13.5 vs 12.4 sec, p = 0.45), or time to calling 911 (8.34 vs 7.65 sec, p = 0.58). Further, there was a statistically significant improvement in participants that said they would probably or definitely perform CCO-CPR in real life after both interventions but no difference between the groups (100% of the experimental group and 93.5% of the control group p < 0.49). Conclusion: Five-minute instruction is not inferior to 30-minute instruction at teaching undergraduate students how to perform quality bystander CCO-CPR. © 2020Note
Open access journalISSN
2666-5204Version
Final published versionae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.resplu.2020.100012
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Copyright is held by the author(s) or the publisher. If your intended use exceeds the permitted uses specified by the license, contact the publisher for more information. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).