Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26019895›Full record

ArticleIranian Red Crescent medical journal2015

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation, chest compression only and teamwork from the perspective of medical doctors, surgeons and anesthesiologists.

Irena Krajina, Slavica Kvolik, Robert Steiner, Kristina Kovacevic, Ivan Lovric

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Iranian Red Crescent medical journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Resuscitation Team Members 'Experiences of Teamwork: A Qualitative Study.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery research
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Irena KrajinaFaculty of Medicine, University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia.
Slavica KvolikFaculty of Medicine, University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia ; Department of Anesthesiology and ICU, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek, Croatia.
Robert SteinerFaculty of Medicine, University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia ; Department of Cardiology, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek, Croatia.
Kristina KovacevicFaculty of Medicine, University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia.
Ivan LovricFaculty of Medicine, University of Osijek, Osijek, Croatia ; Department of Surgery, Osijek University Hospital, Osijek, Croatia.
University of Osijek · HR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew resuscitation guidelines that were proposed by the European Resuscitation Council in 2010 have introduced a new method of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by chest compressions only for untrained individuals.

objectivesWe conducted this study to evaluate differences in attitudes towards CPR among medical doctors, surgeons and anesthesiologists in Osijek University Hospital. A call for help, chest-compression-only resuscitation, mouth-to-mouth ventilation and team-work were recognized as critical points that may influence the outcome. Unfamiliarity with these methods may be indicative of a lack of education in resuscitation and may result in poor outcomes for victims. PATIENTS AND

methodsAn anonymous survey was conducted on 190 medical professionals: 93 medical doctors, 70 surgeons, and 27 anesthesiologists during year 2012 (mean age 41.9 years). The questions were related to previous education in resuscitation, current resuscitation practices and attitudes towards cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Fisher exact test. A P value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

resultsThe only difference between groups was regarding the male and female ratio, with more male surgeons (45, 55, and 11, P < 0.001). All doctors considered CPR as important, but only anesthesiologists knew how often guidelines in CPR change. Approximately 45% of medical doctors, 48% of surgeons and 77% of anesthesiologists reported that they have renewed their knowledge in CPR within the last five years, whereas 34%, 25% and 22% had never renewed their knowledge in the CPR (P = 0.01 between surgeons anesthesiologists). Furthermore, chest-compression-only was recognized as a valuable CPR technique by 25.8% of medical doctors, 14.3% of surgeons and 59.3% of anesthesiologists (P < 0.001). Anesthesiologists estimated a high risk of infection transmission (62%) and were more likely to refuse mouth-to-mouth ventilation when compared to surgeons (25% vs.10%, P = 0.01). Anesthesiologists are most often called for help by their colleagues, only rarely surgeons call their departmental colleagues and nurses to help in CPR.

conclusionsAn insufficient formal education in CPR was registered for all groups, reflecting the lack of familiarity with new CPR methods. A team education, involving doctors and nurses may improve familiarity with CPR and patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationEducationGuideline AdherenceHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeInfection

Identifiers

PMID26019895
PMCPMC4441776
OpenAlexW1977507128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.