Chest Compression Methods Simulated Covid-19 Patient Resuscitation: A Randomized Cross-Oversimulation Trial

Abstract

Background: High-quality chest compression is one of the key elements of resuscitation to return of spontaneous circulation. In the COVID-19 era, medical personnel should wear personal protective equipment (PPE) against aerosol generating procedures (AGP) during resuscitation. However, the use of this personal protection equipment may reduce the effectiveness of medical procedures performed. Objective: We aimed to compare chest compression quality parameters between standard manual chest compression and chest compression with TrueCPR feedback device performed by medical students wearing full personal protractive equipment against aerosol generating procedure.Methods: The study was designed as a randomized, cross-over, single-blinded simulation study. Thirty-two medical students wearing PPE-AGP performed 2-min continuous chest compression on an adult simulator with and without TrueCPR feedback device.Results: Median chest compression depth with and without TrueCPR feedback device varied and amounted to 46 (IQR; 42-53) vs. 41 (IQR; 36-45) mm (MCC vs. TrueCPR, respectively). The manual chest compression rate was 117 (IQR; 112-125) compressions per minute (CPM) and was higher than with TrueCPR feedback device - 107 (IQR; 102-115; p = 0.017). Full chest relaxation in the manual's chest compression technique (without TrueCPR) was 33 (IQR; 26-42)% and was lower than with chest compression with TrueCPR feedback device - 58 (IQR; 40-75)% (p=0.002). Conclusions: We conclude that a TrueCPR feedback device improves chest compression quality during simulated COVID-19 resuscitation performed by medical students wearing PPE-AGP.