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: 2.34). 02/2009; 10(3):328-33. DOI: 10.1097/PCC.0b013e31819886ab
Source: PubMed


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.

13 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The degree of irreversibility of electrode process is proportional to a functional by derivative from speed of process on potential and can be designed through magnitude of direct current and polarizing resistance. Many types of researched electrode processes are given.
    Science and Technology, 2002. KORUS-2002. Proceedings. The 6th Russian-Korean International Symposium on; 02/2002
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Infant CPR guidelines recommend two-finger chest compression with a lone rescuer and two-thumb with two rescuers. Two-thumb provides better chest compression but is perceived to be associated with increased ventilation hands-off time. We hypothesized that lone rescuer two-thumb CPR is associated with increased ventilation cycle time, decreased ventilation quality and fewer chest compressions compared to two-finger CPR in an infant manikin model. Crossover observational study randomizing 34 healthcare providers to perform 2 min CPR at a compression rate of 100 min(-1) using a 30:2 compression:ventilation ratio comparing two-thumb vs. two-finger techniques. A Laerdal Baby ALS Trainer manikin was modified to digitally record compression rate, compression depth and compression pressure and ventilation cycle time (two mouth-to-mouth breaths). Manikin chest rise with breaths was video recorded and later reviewed by two blinded CPR instructors for percent effective breaths. Data (mean+/-SD) were analyzed using a two-tailed paired t-test. Significance was defined qualitatively as p< or =0.05. Mean % effective breaths were 90+/-18.6% in two-thumb and 88.9+/-21.1% in two-finger, p=0.65. Mean time (s) to deliver two mouth-to-mouth breaths was 7.6+/-1.6 in two-thumb and 7.0+/-1.5 in two-finger, p<0.0001. Mean delivered compressions per minute were 87+/-11 in two-thumb and 92+/-12 in two-finger, p=0.0005. Two-thumb resulted in significantly higher compression depth and compression pressure compared to the two-finger technique. Healthcare providers required 0.6s longer time to deliver two breaths during two-thumb lone rescuer infant CPR, but there was no significant difference in percent effective breaths delivered between the two techniques. Two-thumb CPR had 4 fewer delivered compressions per minute, which may be offset by far more effective compression depth and compression pressure compared to two-finger technique.
    Resuscitation 03/2010; 81(6):712-7. DOI:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.12.029 · 4.17 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Neonatal resuscitation techniques are evolving. More sophisticated methods of monitoring have emerged and current practices have been challenged. It is recognised that most newborns will require only gentle assistance to facilitate the transition from intrauterine life. The routine use of suction and oxygen supplementation is no longer recommended and the effectiveness of current methods of delivering ventilatory support has been questioned. The importance of effective use of masks and optimising tidal ventilation rather than pressure generation is emphasised. Newer oximetry technologies and the routine use of capnography may facilitate clinical assessment even during active resuscitation. Methods of warming infants have become increasingly effective and the use of servo-control is emphasised to prevent overheating. Evidence to support therapeutic hypothermia for the birth-asphyxiated baby is solid and cooling should be considered a standard of care. The next revision of the International Liason Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) Guidelines is eagerly awaited in 2010.
    Baillière&#x27 s Best Practice and Research in Clinical Anaesthesiology 09/2010; 24(3):461-74. DOI:10.1016/j.bpa.2010.02.011
Show more