Genetti A, Llewellyn EA. Usefulness of an auditory aid to improve chest compression rate accuracy during cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio) 2023;
33:639-647. [PMID:
37943019 DOI:
10.1111/vec.13351]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2022] [Revised: 08/22/2022] [Accepted: 09/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To assess compression rate accuracy among veterinarians and registered veterinary nurses (RVNs) without and with an audible aid.
DESIGN
Prospective study with use of a canine CPR manikin.
SETTING
Small animal teaching hospital.
SUBJECTS
Thirty-six participants (20 veterinarians and 16 RVNs).
INTERVENTIONS
Each participant completed the first 2-minute cycle of chest compressions without an auditory aid on a canine CPR manikin. Each participant was then randomized to 1 of 3 auditory aid groups (Group B: Bee Gees "Stayin' Alive"; Group Q: Queen "Another One Bites the Dust"; or Group M: traditional metronome) and then completed a second 2-minute cycle of chest compressions with the instruction to synchronize their compression rate with the beat of the auditory aid. An accurate chest compression rate was defined as obtaining a rate between 100 and 120 compressions per minute (cpm).
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
Median number of compressions administered by participants during Cycle 1 for the first minute was 111 (range 88-140) and for the second minute was 107 (range 80-151), with 25 of 36 (69%) participants obtaining an accurate chest compression rate. Median number of compressions administered during Cycle 2 for the first minute was 110 (range 76-125) and for the second minute was 110 (range 72-125), with 34 of 36 participants (94%) obtaining an accurate chest compression rate. Participants were more likely to obtain an accurate chest compression rate when an auditory aid was present compared to without (McNemar's test; P = 0.013). Subgroup analysis suggested the auditory aid was beneficial in Groups Q and M but not Group B (Kruskal-Wallis with Dunn's post hoc testing; P = 0.014, P = 0.0455, and P = 0.5637, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
An auditory aid was associated with improved chest compression rate accuracy. However, as the auditory aid was not beneficial for Group B participants, our findings suggest that some auditory aids are more helpful than others.
Collapse