Trial reportArchives of disease in childhood2017
Randomised crossover trial of rate feedback and force during chest compressions for paediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
Trial report in Archives of disease in childhood, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Do automated real-time feedback devices improve CPR quality? A systematic review of literature.Resuscitation plus · 2021Article
- [Paediatric Life Support].Notfall & rettungsmedizin · 2021Review
- The Baby Shark (Songs Heard Affecting Resuscitation Kinetics) study.BMJ simulation & technology enhanced learning · 2021Article
- Hard and fast, but within limits: is there a trade-off of stroke volume index and diastolic pressure in paediatric resuscitation?Intensive care medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the effect of visual feedback on rate of chest compressions, secondarily relating the forces used.
designRandomised crossover trial.
settingTertiary teaching hospital. SUBJECTS: Fifty trained hospital staff.
interventionsA thin sensor-mat placed over the manikin's chest measured rate and force. Rescuers applied compressions to the same paediatric manikin for two sessions. During one session they received visual feedback comparing their real-time rate with published guidelines. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary: compression rate. Secondary: compression and residual forces.
resultsRate of chest compressions (compressions per minute (compressions per minute; cpm)) varied widely (mean (SD) 111 (13), range 89-168), with a fourfold difference in variation during session 1 between those receiving and not receiving feedback (108 (5) vs 120 (20)). The interaction of session by feedback order was highly significant, indicating that this difference in mean rate between sessions was 14 cpm less (95% CI -22 to -5, p=0.002) in those given feedback first compared with those given it second. Compression force (N) varied widely (mean (SD) 306 (94); range 142-769). Those receiving feedback second (as opposed to first) used significantly lower force (adjusted mean difference -80 (95% CI -128 to -32), p=0.002). Mean residual force (18 N, SD 12, range 0-49) was unaffected by the intervention.
conclusionsWhile visual feedback restricted excessive compression rates to within the prescribed range, applied force remained widely variable. The forces required may differ with growth, but such variation treating one manikin is alarming. Feedback technologies additionally measuring force (effort) could help to standardise and define effective treatments throughout childhood.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.