Single-rescuer Pediatric Resuscitation
- Conditions
- Chest Compression
- Registration Number
- NCT02694900
- Lead Sponsor
- Medical University of Warsaw
- Brief Summary
The objective of this pilot study was to compare the manual chest compressions (CC) versus CC feedback device TrueCPR vs mechanical CC device LifeLine ARM during simulated pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 52
- give voluntary consent to participate in the study
- maximum 1 year of work experience in medicine
- minimum 10 clinical resuscitations
- paramedics, nurses, physicians
- not meet the above criteria
- wrist or low back diseases
- pregnancy
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- CROSSOVER
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method chest compressions effectiveness 1 day the percentage of correct chest compressions relative to the total number of chest compressions
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Depth 1 day correct depth according to European Resuscitation Council 2015 guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation
Ease-of-use 1 day To access subjective opinion about the difficulty of each chest compression method, participants were asked to rate it on a visual analog scale (VAS) with a score from 1 (extremely easy) to 10 (extremely difficult).
Pressure point 1 day correct pressure point according to European Resuscitation Council 2015 guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation
Rate of chest compressions 1 day correct chest compressions rate according to European Resuscitation Council 2015 guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation
Complete pressure release 1 day Complete pressure release measure by manikin software
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
Łukasz Szarpak
🇵🇱Warszawa, Poland
Łukasz Szarpak🇵🇱Warszawa, Poland