ArticleSingapore medical journal2021
Simplified instructional phrasing in dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation - when 'less is more'.
Article in Singapore medical journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Potential to enhance telephone cardiopulmonary resuscitation with improved instructions - findings from a simulation-based manikin study with lay rescuers.BMC emergency medicine · 2023Trial
- Telephone-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a simulated environment: A pilot exploratory study evaluating first responder adherence and dispatcher performance.Resuscitation plus · 2025Article
- Interventions to optimize dispatcher-assisted CPR instructions: A scoping review.Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
- Optimizing dispatcher-bystander dyadic collaboration in emergency medical communication to improve cardiac arrest response.Clinical and experimental emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- A scoping review to determine the barriers and facilitators to initiation and performance of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation during emergency calls.Resuscitation plus · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn our national emergency dispatch centre, the standard protocol for dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DACPR) in out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCAs) involves the instruction 'push 100 times a minute 5 cm deep'. As part of quality improvement, the instruction was simplified to 'push hard and fast'.
methodsWe analysed all dispatcher-diagnosed OHCAs over four months in 2018: January to February ('push 100 times a minute 5 cm deep') and August to September ('push hard and fast'). We also performed secondary per-protocol analysis based on the protocol used: (a) standard (n = 48); (b) simplified (n = 227); and (c) own words (n = 231).
resultsA total of 506 cases were included: 282 in the 'before' group and 224 in the 'after' group. Adherence to the protocol was 15.2% in the 'before' phase and 72.8% in the 'after' phase (p < 0.001). The mean time between instruction and first compression for the 'before' and 'after' groups was 34.36 seconds and 26.83 seconds, respectively (p < 0.001). Time to first compression was 238.62 seconds and 218.83 seconds in the 'before' and 'after' groups, respectively (p = 0.016). In the per-protocol analysis, the interval between instruction and compression was 37.19 seconds, 28.31 seconds and 32.40 seconds in the standard protocol, simplified protocol and 'own words' groups, respectively (p = 0.005). The need for paraphrasing was 60.4% in the standard protocol group and 81.5% in the simplified group (p < 0.001).
conclusionSimplified instructions were associated with a shorter interval between instruction and first compression. Efforts should be directed at simplifying DACPR instructions.
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.