Randomised controlled trial of simulation-based education for mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation training. Issue 5 (23rd April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Coggins, Andrew R; Nottingham, Cameron; Byth, Karen; Ho, Kevin R; Aulia, Felicia A; Murphy, Margaret; Shetty, Amith L; Todd, Anna; Moore, Nathan
• Is Part Of: Emergency medicine journal. Volume 36:Issue 5(2019)
• Page Start: 266
• Page End: 272
• Publication Date: 2019-04-23
• Subjects: education -- resuscitation, training -- education, teaching -- cardiac arrest; Emergency medicine -- Periodicals; 616.02505
• DOI: 10.1136/emermed-2017-207431
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1472-0205

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: Mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation (M-CPR) is increasingly used in the management of cardiac arrest. There are no previously reported randomised studies investigating M-CPR training. This study of newly trained M-CPR providers hypothesised that a brief simulation-based intervention after 4 months would improve M-CPR performance at 6 months. Methods: This study used a simulated 'in situ' cardiac arrest model. The M-CPR device used was a proprietary Lund University Cardiac Assist System 3 machine (Physio Control, Redmond, Washington, USA). Standardised baseline training was provided to all participants. Following training, baseline performance was assessed. The primary outcome measure was the time taken to initiate M-CPR and the secondary outcome was performance against a checklist of errors. Participants were then randomised to intervention group (simulation training) or control group (routine clinical use of M-CPR). After 6 months the outcome measures were reassessed. Comparative statistical tests used an intention-to-treat analysis. Results: 112 participants were enrolled. The intervention group (n=60) and control group (n=52) had similar demographic characteristics. At the 6-month assessment, median time to M-CPR initiation was 27.0 s (IQR 22.0–31.0) in the intervention group and 31.0 s (IQR 25.6–46.0) in the control group (p=0.003). The intervention group demonstrated fewer errors compared with controls at 6 months (p<0.001) Conclusion: In this randomised study of approaches to M-CPR training, providers receiving additional simulation-based training had higher retention levels of M-CPR skills. Therefore, when resuscitation skills are newly learnt, provision follow-up training should be an important consideration.