Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39717499›Full record

ArticleResuscitation plus2024

Evaluating video-supported layperson CPR compared to a standard training course: A randomized controlled trial.

S A Goldberg, R E Cash, G A Peters, D Jiang, C O'Brien, M A Hasdianda, E M Eberl, K J Salerno, J Lees, J Kaithamattam and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Resuscitation plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05983640 (Just in Time Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation Trial), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05983640 naunknown statusnot on this map

Just in Time Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation Trial (JITCPR-T): Comparison of a Brief Video to Traditional CPR Training: a Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorBrigham and Women's HospitalRan2023 to 2024Enrolled350ConditionsCardiopulmonary Arrest With Successful Resuscitation, Educational ProblemsArmsVideo, AHA course
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors.

S A GoldbergBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
R E CashMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
G A PetersBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
D JiangMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
C O'BrienMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
M A HasdiandaBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
E M EberlMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
K J SalernoMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
J LeesCoastal Medical Transportation Systems, Boston, MA, USA.
J KaithamattamMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
J TomMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
A R PanchalThe Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
E GoralnickBrigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: While just-in-time (JIT) training is associated with time and cost savings, limited evidence directly compares layperson CPR performance using JIT videos to in-person CPR courses. We measured layperson CPR performance using a JIT video compared to an in-person course or no training. Methods: Adult employees at a professional sports stadium were randomized to perform CPR in a simulated scenario a) after completing an AHA HeartSaver® course, b) using a JIT training video, or c) neither (control). CPR performance was assessed by trained evaluators and QCPR-enabled simulators. The primary outcome was the performance of pre-defined critical actions. Participants were blinded to study objectives and trained evaluators used standardized checklists. Results: Of 230 eligible subjects, 221 were included in analysis, without significant differences in group characteristics. Correct CPR performance was low, though significantly higher in the AHA group (AHA: 40%, 95%CI 28-51; JIT: 15%, 95%CI 8-26; control 10%, 95%CI 4-19). Compression fraction was significantly greater in the AHA group (90%, IQR 69-98) compared to JIT (61%, IQR 29-89) or control (65%, IQR 33-93). An AED was requested more frequently in the AHA group (47%) than in the JIT (15%) or control (10%) groups. Conclusions: While overall performance of correct CPR skills was best following a traditional CPR course, laypersons using real-time video training performed as well as those taking an AHA HeartSaver® course on several key measures including time to chest compressions and compression rate.Trial Registration.NCT05983640.

Indexed as

Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationEmergency Response EducationJust in Time TrainingLaypersonsPublic Health EducationSimulationVideo-based Learning

Identifiers

PMID39717499
PMCPMC11665291

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.