Effect of alternative chest compression techniques in infant and child on rescuer performance

University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Pediatric Critical Care Medicine (Impact Factor: 2.33). 02/2009; 10(3):328-33. DOI: 10.1097/PCC.0b013e31819886ab
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Current chest compression (CC) guidelines for an infant recommend a two-finger (TF) technique with lone rescuer and a two- thumb (TT) technique with two rescuers, and for a child either an one hand (OH) or a two hand (TH) technique with one or two rescuers. The effect of a 30:2 compression:ventilation ratio using these techniques on CC quality and rescuer fatigue is unknown. We hypothesized that during lone rescuer CC, TT technique, in infant and TH in child achieve better compression depth (CD) without additional rescuer fatigue compared with TF and OH, respectively.
Randomized observational study.
University-affiliated pediatric hospital.
Adult healthcare providers certified in basic life support or pediatric advanced life support.
Laerdal baby advanced life support trainer and Resusci junior manikin were modified to digitally record CD, compression pressure (CP) and compression rate. Sixteen subjects were randomized to each of the four techniques to perform 5 minutes of lone rescuer 30:2 compression:ventilation cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Rescuer heart rate (HR) and respiratory rate were recorded continuously and the recovery time interval for HR/respiratory rate to return to baseline was determined. Subjects were blinded to data recording. Groups were compared using two-sample, two-sided Student's t tests.
Two-thumb technique generated significantly higher CD and peak CP compared with TF (p < 0.001); there was no significant difference between OH vs. TH. TF showed decay of CD and CP over time compared with TT. Compression rate (per minute) and actual compressions delivered were not significantly different between groups. No significant differences in fatigue and recovery time were observed, except the TT group had greater increase in the rescuer's HR (bpm) from baseline compared with TF group (p = 0.04).
Two-thumb compression provides higher CD and CP compared with TF without any evidence of decay in quality and additional rescuer fatigue over 5 minutes. There was no significant difference in child CC quality or rescuer fatigue between OH and TH. Two-thumb technique is preferred for infant CC and our data support the current guidelines for child CC.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to assess the quality of chest compressions performed by inexperienced rescuers using three different techniques: two-hand, right one-hand, and left one-hand. We performed a prospective, randomised, crossover study in a simulated 6-year-old paediatric manikin model. Each participant performed 2-minute continuous chest compressions, using three different techniques. Chest compression quality data, including compression rate, compression depth, and residual leaning was recorded by a Q-CPR™ compression sensor connected to HeartStart MRx (Philips Healthcare, Andover, MA, USA). To examine trends in chest compression performance over time, each 2-minute period was divided into six consecutive 20-second epochs. The 36 participants completed 108 two-minute trials, consisting of a total of 25,030 compressions. The mean compression rates [95% confidence interval] were as follows: two-hand, 116.8 [111.7-121.9]; left one-hand, 115.0 [109.9-120.1]; and right one-hand, 115.5 [110.4-120.6] (p = 0.565). The mean compression depth for two-hand was 38.7 mm (37.1-40.2), which was higher than for left one-hand (36.3 mm [34.8-37.9]) or right one-hand (35.4 mm [33.9-37.0]) (p < 0.001). Chest compression depth declined over time, regardless of the technique (p < 0.001). The pattern of compression depth change over time was similar for all techniques (p > 0.999). The residual leaning rate was higher with two-hand (40.7 [27.9-53.5]) than that for left one-hand (29.2 [16.4-42.0]) or right one-hand (25.8 [13.0-38.6]) (p = 0.021). For paediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation by inexperienced rescuers, the two-hand technique has the advantage of producing deeper compressions than the one-hand technique, but it is accompanied by more frequent residual leaning. For the one-hand techniques, the right and left hand produced chest compressions of similar quality.
    Scandinavian Journal of Trauma Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine 04/2015; 23(1):36. DOI:10.1186/s13049-015-0118-y · 1.93 Impact Factor
  • Monatsschrift Kinderheilkunde 08/2014; 162(8):701-710. DOI:10.1007/s00112-014-3102-0 · 0.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: AimThe two-thumb encircling (TTE) technique often results in suboptimal cardiac compression and does not meet the requirements of current resuscitation guidelines. We compared this technique with the vertical two-thumb (VTT) technique, our novel modification of the TTE technique.Methods This was a prospective randomised crossover simulation study of out-of-hospital infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Participants who had completed a basic life support course performed 10 cycles of cardiac compressions on a manikin for each technique.ResultsWe enrolled 36 medical doctors who had applied for a hospital internship in this study. The VTT generated significantly higher pressure than the TTE and the pressure difference ranged from 26.8-62.9mmHg for each cycle, with a mean difference of 43.5mmHg (95% CI, 37.8-49.2). The difference in pressure showed a tendency to increase with increasing cycles of cardiac compressions. The participants’ heart and respiratory rate was higher with the VTT, but they said that it was easier to perform cardiac compressions with this technique.Conclusion The VTT technique generated more pressure than the TTE technique in a simulated model of infant out-of-hospital CPR. It can provide an alternative compression technique for effective infant CPR, especially for the rescuers with small hands or a weak grip.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
    Acta Paediatrica 11/2014; 104(2). DOI:10.1111/apa.12857 · 1.84 Impact Factor