Premium
Ensayo Clínico Aleatorizado Acerca de la Retención a Largo Plazo de las Habilidades en Resucitación Cardiopulmonar: Comparación entre una Formación Abreviada sólo con Compresión Torácica y una Formación Convencional
Author(s) -
Nishiyama Chika,
Iwami Taku,
Kitamura Tetsuhisa,
Ando Masahiko,
Sakamoto Tetsuya,
Marukawa Seishiro,
Kawamura Takashi
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
academic emergency medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.221
H-Index - 124
eISSN - 1553-2712
pISSN - 1069-6563
DOI - 10.1111/acem.12293
Subject(s) - medicine , cardiopulmonary resuscitation , randomized controlled trial , resuscitation , compression (physics) , basic life support , anesthesia , physical therapy , materials science , composite material
Objectives It is unclear how much the length of a cardiopulmonary resuscitation ( CPR ) training program can be reduced without ruining its effectiveness. The authors aimed to compare CPR skills 6 months and 1 year after training between shortened chest compression–only CPR training and conventional CPR training. Methods Participants were randomly assigned to either the compression‐only CPR group, which underwent a 45‐minute training program consisting of chest compressions and automated external defibrillator ( AED ) use with personal training manikins, or the conventional CPR group, which underwent a 180‐minute training program with chest compressions, rescue breathing, and AED use. Participants' resuscitation skills were evaluated 6 months and 1 year after the training. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of appropriate chest compressions 1 year after the training. Results A total of 146 persons were enrolled, and 63 (87.5%) in the compression‐only CPR group and 56 (75.7%) in the conventional CPR group completed the 1‐year evaluation. The compression‐only CPR group was superior to the conventional CPR group regarding the proportion of appropriate chest compression (mean ± SD = 59.8% ± 40.0% vs. 46.3% ± 28.6%; p = 0.036) and the number of appropriate chest compressions (mean ± SD = 119.5 ± 80.0 vs. 77.2 ± 47.8; p = 0.001). Time without chest compression in the compression‐only CPR group was significantly shorter than that in the conventional CPR group (mean ± SD = 11.8 ± 21.1 seconds vs. 52.9 ± 14.9 seconds; p < 0.001). Conclusions The shortened compression‐only CPR training program appears to help the general public retain CPR skills better than the conventional CPR training program.