Training family members of patients at risk of cardiac arrest to administer CPR may be done as effectively with a video-only kit as with a video kit that includes a manikin to practice hands-on resuscitation.
This was the conclusion of a new study from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania (Penn) that is being presented during the American Heart Association Scientific Sessions 2015 in Orlando, FL.
The researchers note that less than 40% of cardiac arrests in the US are treated by cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) delivered by bystanders, and this has prompted calls to improve education and training of the public in how to give CPR.
Some studies suggest an effective way to do this is with a video self-instruction (VSI) kit that includes a small inflatable manikin to practice on. But the cost of such kits can be prohibitive, so the researchers decided to explore whether a less costly option, using only video, can be as effective.
When a person has a sudden cardiac arrest, their heart stops pumping blood around the body. Giving them CPR – compressing their chest repeatedly – pumps the blood around manually and ensures the brain keeps receiving oxygen while waiting for the ambulance. CPR can save lives and reduce the chance of permanent brain injury.
Study leader Audrey L. Blewer, of Penn’s Center for Resuscitation Science, says:
“Most cardiac arrests take place in the home, where a patient’s best chance of survival is having a family member who knows and can properly administer CPR.”
The traditional method of group classes, which are more commonly attended by people like health professionals and life guards who need mastery and certification in CPR as part of their job, can cost at least $100 per person.
But the new study shows that for the general public, where cost and time may be more of an issue, training that uses video only can be as effective in helping people learn basic CPR as using a kit that includes a manikin, says Blewer.
The study took place at eight hospitals, and the participants were over 1,600 family members of patients at risk for cardiac arrest who were being treated on inpatient wards. The participants were randomly assigned to be given either video-only training or the VSI kit before patient discharge.
Six months later, the researchers assessed the participants’ CPR skills – focusing on two measures in particular, chest compression rate and depth.
The findings show that there was no significant difference between the groups in chest compression rates, but in depth of chest compressions, the VSI group performed deeper ones on average (45 mm) than the video-only trained group (40 mm).
But the researchers note that the clinical impact of the differences between the two groups is small, especially “given recent clinical research suggesting maximum survival benefit at depths between 40-55 mm.”
Senior author Benjamin S. Abella, associate professor of emergency medicine, says their findings show there is great potential to increase public education of CPR, especially for people who cannot access training programs. He adds:
“Knowing that the manikin may not be necessary for basic training, we could conceivably show CPR training videos in public places, such as a doctor’s waiting room or at the DMV [Department of Motor Vehicles], and they will actually be beneficial in providing this life-saving skill.”
Earlier this year, Medical News Today reported on a study that found CPR from bystanders can save lives. In a paper published in JAMA, the researchers concluded that CPR given promptly by ordinary bystanders is linked to substantially higher survival among victims of sudden cardiac arrest.