Single-rescuer Pediatric Resuscitation

Chest Compression Clinical Trial

— SRPR  

Official title:

Comparison of Three Different Chest Compressions Methods During Pediatric Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: A Pilot, Randomized Crossover Manikin Trial

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT02694900
• Other study ID #: 02.009.1MR
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• First received: February 16, 2016
• Last updated: March 12, 2016
• Start date: February 2016
• Est. completion date: March 2016

Study information

• Verified date: March 2016
• Source: Medical University of Warsaw
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Health authority: Poland: Ministry of Science and Higher Education
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The objective of this pilot study was to compare the manual chest compressions (CC) versus CC feedback device TrueCPR vs mechanical CC device LifeLine ARM during simulated pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 52
• Est. completion date: March 2016
• Est. primary completion date: March 2016
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: Both
• Age group: 18 Years to 65 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• give voluntary consent to participate in the study

• maximum 1 year of work experience in medicine

• minimum 10 clinical resuscitations

• paramedics, nurses, physicians

Exclusion Criteria:

• not meet the above criteria

• wrist or low back diseases

• pregnancy

Study Design

Allocation: Randomized, Intervention Model: Crossover Assignment, Masking: Open Label, Primary Purpose: Treatment

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Chest Compression

Intervention

Other:
• Manually chest compressions
Chest compressions performed manually without any device

Device:
• Cardiopump
Chest compressions performed with Cardiopump
• LifeLine ARM
Chest compressions performed using mechanical chest compressions system LifeLine ARM

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Poland	Lukasz Szarpak	Warszawa

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Medical University of Warsaw

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Poland, 

References & Publications (1)

Truszewski Z, Szarpak L, Kurowski A, Evrin T, Zasko P, Bogdanski L, Czyzewski L. Randomized trial of the chest compressions effectiveness comparing 3 feedback cardiopulmonary resuscitation devices and standard basic life support by nurses. Am J Emerg Med. 2015 Nov 4. pii: S0735-6757(15)00954-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.11.003. [Epub ahead of print] — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	chest compressions effectiveness	the percentage of correct chest compressions relative to the total number of chest compressions	1 day	No
Secondary	Depth	correct depth according to European Resuscitation Council 2015 guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation	1 day	No
Secondary	Pressure point	correct pressure point according to European Resuscitation Council 2015 guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation	1 day	No
Secondary	Complete pressure release	Complete pressure release measure by manikin software	1 day	No
Secondary	Rate of chest compressions	correct chest compressions rate according to European Resuscitation Council 2015 guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation	1 day	No
Secondary	Ease-of-use	To access subjective opinion about the difficulty of each chest compression method, participants were asked to rate it on a visual analog scale (VAS) with a score from 1 (extremely easy) to 10 (extremely difficult).	1 day	No