Trial reportBMJ open2018
Training approaches for the deployment of a mechanical chest compression device: a randomised controlled manikin study.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanical versus manual chest compressions in the treatment of in-hospital cardiac arrest patients in a non-shockable rhythm: a randomised controlled feasibility trial (COMPRESS-RCT).Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2018Trial
- Nontechnical Skills and Leadership Are Associated With More Efficient Mechanical Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Deployment in Real-World Cardiac Arrest.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Observational
- Singapore Advanced Cardiac Life Support Guidelines 2026.Singapore medical journal · 2026Article
- Randomized controlled trial comparing pit crew resuscitation model against standard advanced life support training.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2022Article
- Back Plate Marking of a Mechanical Chest Compression Device to Reduce the Duration of Chest Compression Interruptions.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2022Article
- Singapore Advanced Cardiac Life Support Guidelines 2021.Singapore medical journal · 2021Article
- [Adult advanced life support].Notfall & rettungsmedizin · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the effect of training strategy on team deployment of a mechanical chest compression device.
designRandomised controlled manikin trial.
settingLarge teaching hospital in the UK.
participantsTwenty teams, each comprising three clinicians. Participating individuals were health professionals with intermediate or advanced resuscitation training.
interventionsTeams were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive either standard mechanical chest compression device training or pit-crew device training. Training interventions lasted up to 1 h. Performance was measured immediately after training in a standardised simulated cardiac arrest scenario in which teams were required to deploy a mechanical chest compression device. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was chest compression flow fraction in the minute preceding the first mechanical chest compression. Secondary outcomes included cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality and mechanical device deployment metrics, and non-technical skill performance. Outcomes were assessed using video recordings of the test scenario.
resultsIn relation to the primary outcome of chest compression flow fraction in the minute preceding the first mechanical chest compression, we found that pit-crew training was not superior to standard training (0.76 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.79) vs 0.77 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.82), mean difference -0.01 (95% CI -0.06 to 0.03), P=0.572). There was also no difference between groups in performance in relation to any secondary outcome.
conclusionsPit-crew training, compared with standard training, did not improve team deployment of a mechanical chest device in a simulated cardiac arrest scenario. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN43049287; Pre-results.
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.