Effects of the Cardio First AngelTM on chest compression performance

Guenther, S.; Schirren, Malte; Boulesteix, Anne‐Laure; Busen, Hannah; Poettinger, T.; Pichlmaier, A. M.; Khaladj, Nawid; Hagl, Christian

doi:10.3233/thc-170862

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One subsequent clinical trial ( n = 80) using the CFA device reported improved ROSC rates when compared to standard manual compressions [7]. This was followed by simulation studies using laypersons that showed improved hand position, mean compression depth, rate, and compression fraction with the CFA device [20, 21]. Several other non-AED compression feedback devices have shown promising results in simulation studies but lack clinical testing [7, 15, 16, 18, 22, 32].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Real-time compression feedback for patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest: a multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo determine if real-time compression feedback using a non-automated hand-held device improves patient outcomes from in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA).MethodsWe conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled, parallel study (no crossover) of patients with IHCA in the mixed medical–surgical intensive care units (ICUs) of eight academic hospitals. Patients received either standard manual chest compressions or compressions performed with real-time feedback using the Cardio First Angel™ (CFA) device. The primary outcome was sustained return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and secondary outcomes were survival to ICU and hospital discharge.ResultsOne thousand four hundred fifty-four subjects were randomized; 900 were included. Sustained ROSC was significantly improved in the CFA group (66.7% vs. 42.4%, P < 0.001), as was survival to ICU discharge (59.8% vs. 33.6%) and survival to hospital discharge (54% vs. 28.4%, P < 0.001). Outcomes were not affected by intra-group comparisons based on intubation status. ROSC, survival to ICU, and hospital discharge were noted to be improved in inter-group comparisons of non-intubated patients, but not intubated ones.ConclusionUse of the CFA compression feedback device improved event survival and survival to ICU and hospital discharge.Trial registrationThe study was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02845011), registered retrospectively on July 21, 2016.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Real-time compression feedback for patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest: a multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have reported that more than 90% of CCs using feedback devices were delivered in the correct position [2][3][4][5]. However, these studies used the Resusci Anne Skill Reporter Manikin ™ (Laerdal Medical Corporation, Stavanger, Norway), which has a 10 × 10 cm 2 plate on the back of the chest, or the Ambu ® Man Torso (Ambu A/S, Ballerup, Denmark) CPR manikin, which has a 9 × 6 cm 2 plate on the back of the chest.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 2020 International Consensus guidelines recommend the use of a feedback device for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training [1] to facilitate effective CPR based on the evaluation of its components, including compression depth, compression rate, chest wall recoil, and interruption time [2][3][4][5][6]. Some clinical studies demonstrated that CPR depth and rate were significantly estimated better with a feedback device [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adequacy of compression positioning using the feedback device during chest compressions by medical staff in a simulation study

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The 2020 American Heart Association guidelines recommend the use of a feedback device during chest compressions (CCs). However, these devices are only placed visually by medical personnel on the lower half of the sternum and do not provide feedback on the adequacy of the pressure-delivery position. In this study, we investigated whether medical staff could deliver CCs at the adequate compression position using a feedback device and identified where the inadequate position was compressed. Methods This simulation-based, prospective single-centre study enrolled 44 medical personnel who were assigned to four different groups based on the standing position and the hand in contact with the feedback device as follows: right–left (R–l), right–right (R–r), left–right (L–r), and left–left (L–l), respectively. The sensor position where the maximal average pressure was applied during CCs using the feedback device were ascertained with a flexible capacitive pressure sensor. We determined if this position is the adequate compression position or not. The intergroup differences in the frequency of the adequate compression position, the maximal average pressure, compression rate, depth and recoil were determined. Results The frequencies of adequate compression positioning were 55, 50, 58, and 60% in the R–l, R–r, L–r, and L–l groups, respectively, with no significant intergroup difference (p = 0.917). Inadequate position occurred in the front, back, hypothenar and thenar sides. The maximal average pressure did not significantly differ among the groups (p = 0.0781). The average compression rate was 100–110 compressions/min in each group, the average depth was 5–6 cm, and the average recoil was 0.1 cm, with no significant intergroup differences (p = 0.0882, 0.9653, and 0.2757, respectively). Conclusions We found that only approximately half of the medical staff could deliver CCs using the feedback device at an adequate compression position and the inadequate position occurred in all sides. Resuscitation courses should be designed to educate trainees about the proper placement during CCs using a feedback device while also evaluating the correct compression position.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several community intervention trials have examined ways to improve bystander CPR rates 34–41. Some of these have focused on improving CPR training and others on the quality of CPR technique 34–36. Other successful strategies to increase bystander CPR rates include dispatch of lay and/or professional voluntary responders by emergency services and use of apps to activate trained citizens and off-duty paramedics and doctors 42–46.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving community-based first response to out of hospital cardiac arrest (FirstCPR): protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionOut-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is associated with poor survival outcomes, but prompt bystander action can more than double survival rates. Being trained, confident and willing-to-perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) are known predictors of bystander action. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of a community organisation targeted multicomponent education and training initiative on being willing to respond to OHCAs. The study employs a novel approach to reaching community members via social and cultural groups, and the intervention aims to address commonly cited barriers to training including lack of availability, time and costs.Methods and analysisFirstCPR is a cluster randomised trial that will be conducted across 200 community groups in urban and regional Australia. It will target community groups where CPR training is not usual. Community groups (clusters) will be stratified by region, size and organisation type, and then randomly assigned to either immediately receive the intervention programme, comprising digital and in-person education and training opportunities about CPR and OHCA over 12 months, or a delayed programme implementation. The primary outcome is self-reported ‘training and willingness-to-perform CPR’ at 12 months. It will be assessed through surveys of group members that consent in intervention versus control groups and administered prior to control groups receiving the intervention. The primary analysis will follow intention-to-treat principles, use log binomial regression accounting for baseline covariates and be conducted at the individual level, while accounting for clustering within communities. Focus groups and interviews will be conducted to examine barriers and enablers to implementation and costs will also be examined.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from The University of Sydney. Findings from this study will be disseminated via presentations at scientific conferences, publications in peer-reviewed journals, scientific and lay reports.Trial registration numberACTRN12621000367842.

show abstract

Effects of the Cardio First AngelTM on chest compression performance

Abstract: Chest compression as performed by laymen was significantly improved with regard to compression depth when using the CFA for guidance and feedback. With the device, no cases of incorrect hand positioning occurred in any group.

Cited by 6 publications

References 18 publications

Real-time compression feedback for patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest: a multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial

Real-time compression feedback for patients with in-hospital cardiac arrest: a multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial

Adequacy of compression positioning using the feedback device during chest compressions by medical staff in a simulation study

Improving community-based first response to out of hospital cardiac arrest (FirstCPR): protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About