Easy-to-learn CPR programme enhances laypeople’s resuscitation performance
A simplified training for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for laypersons, which focuses on continuous and with simple hand placement for chest compressions, may improve acquisition and retention of CPR algorithms, as well as the quality of chest compressions than a standard CPR programme, a recent study suggests.
“This easy-to-learn CPR will not only encourage the public to acquire CPR skills, but also increase their likelihood of performing it should the need arise,” researchers said.
Results showed that participants in the simplified CPR group performed significantly better on the CPR algorithm than did those in the standard CPR group (p<0.01). [Singapore Med J 2018;59:217-223]
There was no significant between-group difference in time taken to initiate CPR, but a significantly higher number of compressions and proportion of adequate compressions was shown by the simplified vs the standard group (p<0.01).
Furthermore, the simplified CPR group demonstrated significantly shorter hands-off time than did the standard CPR group (p<0.001).
“Our study showed that participants in the simplified CPR group performed significantly better on the CPR algorithm than those in the standard CPR group 2 months after training,” researchers said.
In previous studies, test scenarios lacked realism. The present study directed much effort at improving the realism of the simulated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) to assess participant performance under more realistic conditions. [Resuscitation 2008;79:90-96; Resuscitation 2012;83:353-359; Prehosp Emerg Care 2006;10:247-253]
In order to create a more realistic OHCA scenario, researchers dressed the recording manikin as a woman in a wig and long dress, and smeared glycerine around its mouth to simulate saliva secretions. They also set the test duration to 8 minutes to better mimic the local ambulance response time.
“Although CPR learning retention was not evaluated in our study, previous studies have reported consistent findings on the deterioration of CPR learning over time,” researchers said. [Resuscitation 2008;79:90-96; Resuscitation 2003;58:177-185]
“Despite the potential of learning deterioration in both forms of CPR, our study supports the long-term effectiveness of simplified CPR training compared to standard CPR for facilitating the learning and retention of CPR steps,” they added.
The simplified CPR algorithm allowed the learning of continuous chest compressions without mouth-to-mouth ventilations and a one-step landmark tracing technique, reducing the required number of psychomotor steps.
On the other hand, the standard CPR programme involved a considerable number of psychomotor skills to be learnt and performed, thus placing unrealistic demands on the learning curve of bystanders. [Resuscitation 2001;50:27-37]
A study by Riegel and colleagues suggested that simplifying the current standard CPR could allow laypersons to learn and remember the vital steps and actions that could help save a life in the event of a real emergency. [Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation. New York: Humana Press, 2005]
The present study recruited and randomized 85 laypersons (aged 21–60 years) to undertake either a 2-hour simplified or standard CPR training session. Participants were tested on a simulated OHCA scenario 2 months after the training.
A validated CPR algorithm checklist was used to observe and assess participant performance on the sequence of CPR steps. The quality of chest compression and ventilation was assessed from the recording manikin.