Abstract 306: Evaluating Layperson CPR Performance Supported by a Just-in-Time Video Compared to a Standard Training Course
Abstract only Background: Just-in-time (JIT) video training has been proposed as an alternative to in-person CPR courses, with associated time and cost savings. Research Question: Does a JIT training video improve layperson performance of CPR? Aim: Measure CPR performance using a JIT video compared...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Circulation (New York, N.Y.) Vol. 148; no. Suppl_1 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
07-11-2023
|
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract only
Background:
Just-in-time (JIT) video training has been proposed as an alternative to in-person CPR courses, with associated time and cost savings.
Research Question:
Does a JIT training video improve layperson performance of CPR?
Aim:
Measure CPR performance using a JIT video compared to the American Heart Association (AHA) HeartSaver® CPR AED Training course.
Methods:
A convenience sample of laypeople was randomized to perform CPR in a simulated scenario a) after participating in an AHA HeartSaver® course led by experienced instructors, b) with access to a JIT training video, or c) control, with no assistance or training. CPR quality was assessed by trained evaluators and objective performance assessed using Laerdal QCPR-enabled simulators. The primary outcome was performance of correct CPR.
Results:
Of 230 eligible subjects, 226 were randomized with no significant differences in baseline characteristics across groups. Prevalence of correct CPR 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). Overall, 94% of participants performed compressions within 1 minute, with no difference between groups. An AED was called for more frequently in the AHA group (47%) than the JIT (15%) or control (10%) groups. Flow fraction was significantly better in the AHA group (89%, IQR 77-99) compared to the JIT (75%, IQR 47-90) or control (49%, IQR 22-74) groups and compression rates of 100-120 were more frequent in the AHA (51%) and JIT groups (47%) compared to controls (27%).
Conclusions:
While correct performance of specific CPR skills varied in this sample, laypersons using a JIT training video performed as well as those taking an AHA HeartSaver® course on several key measures such as rapid chest compression and compression rate. JIT video training may be a viable option for supporting untrained bystander CPR performance, though further evaluation is needed to identify optimal strategies for implementation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0009-7322 1524-4539 |
| DOI: | 10.1161/circ.148.suppl_1.306 |