Effect of feedback on delaying deterioration in quality of compressions during 2 minutes of continuous chest compressions: a randomized manikin study investigating performance with and without feedback

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Good quality basic life support (BLS) improves outcome following cardiac arrest. As BLS performance deteriorates over time we performed a parallel group, superiority study to investigate the effect of feedback on quality of chest compression with the hypothesis that feedback delays deterioration of quality of compressions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Participants attending a national one-day conference on cardiac arrest and CPR in Denmark were randomized to perform single-rescuer BLS with (n = 26) or without verbal and visual feedback (n = 28) on a manikin using a ZOLL AED plus. Data were analyzed using Rescuenet Code Review. Blinding of participants was not possible, but allocation concealment was performed. Primary outcome was the proportion of delivered compressions within target depth compared over a 2-minute period within the groups and between the groups. Secondary outcome was the proportion of delivered compressions within target rate compared over a 2-minute period within the groups and between the groups. Performance variables for 30-second intervals were analyzed and compared.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>24 (92%) and 23 (82%) had CPR experience in the group with and without feedback respectively. 14 (54%) were CPR instructors in the feedback group and 18 (64%) in the group without feedback. Data from 26 and 28 participants were analyzed respectively. Although median values for proportion of delivered compressions within target depth were higher in the feedback group (0-30 s: 54.0%; 30-60 s: 88.0%; 60-90 s: 72.6%; 90-120 s: 87.0%), no significant difference was found when compared to without feedback (0-30 s: 19.6%; 30-60 s: 33.1%; 60-90 s: 44.5%; 90-120 s: 32.7%) and no significant deteriorations over time were found within the groups. In the feedback group a significant improvement was found in the proportion of delivered compressions below target depth when the subsequent intervals were compared to the first 30 seconds (0-30 s: 3.9%; 30-60 s: 0.0%; 60-90 s: 0.0%; 90-120 s: 0.0%). Significant differences were not found in secondary outcome and in other performance variables between the groups and over time</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Quality of CPR was maintained during 2 minutes of continuous compressions regardless of feedback in a group of trained rescuers.</p

Ultrasound guided repositioning of a new suture-method catheter for adductor canal block – a randomized pilot study in healthy volunteers

Abstract Background We performed a randomized, blinded pilot study in 12 volunteers to assess the feasibility to reposition an intentionally displaced suture-method catheter for two different insertion techniques for adductor canal block. Methods Each volunteer had an ultrasound-guided suture-method catheter placed in the adductor canal (AC) in both legs. The catheters were placed using a perpendicular technique in one leg and a parallel technique in the other leg, according to randomization. 15 mL lidocaine 1% (LA) was injected in each catheter. Successful primary placement was defined as combined LA spread within the AC and loss of cold sensation 15 min after injection. All catheters were intentionally displaced, and subsequently repositioned using ultrasound. Another dose of lidocaine (15 mL 1%) was injected through the catheters and assessed for successful repositioning. Results Successful primary placement was achieved in 83% (95% CI 55–95%) of catheters placed perpendicular to the AC, and in 75% (95% CI 47–91%) of catheters placed parallel to the AC. Of those with successful primary placement, 100% (95% CI 72–100%) of catheters placed perpendicular to the AC, and 67% (95% CI 35–88%)) placed parallel to the AC could be repositioned. Conclusions Placement and secondary repositioning after displacement of a suture-method catheter within the adductor canal is achievable. A perpendicular technique seems more reliable. Trial registration NCT03315481 clinicaltrials.gov. The study was submitted on March 1, 2017. Due to clerical error, the study was posted on October 20, 2017

Cardiovascular consequence of reclining vs. sitting beach-chair body position for induction of anesthesia

The sitting beach-chair position is regularly used for shoulder surgery and anesthesia may be induced in that position. We tested the hypothesis that the cardiovascular challenge induced by induction of anesthesia is attenuated if the patient is placed in a reclining beach-chair position. Anesthesia was induced with propofol in the sitting beach-chair (n=15) or with the beach-chair tilted backwards to a reclining beach-chair position (n=15). The last group was stepwise tilted to the sitting beach-chair position prior to surgery. Hypotension was treated with ephedrine. Continuous hemodynamic variables were recorded by photoplethysmography and frontal cerebral oxygenation (ScO2) by near infrared spectroscopy.Significant differences were only observed immediately after the induction when patients induced in a reclining beach-chair position had higher mean arterial pressure (MAP) (35±12 vs. 45±15 % reduction from baseline, p=0.04) and ScO2 (7±6 vs. 1±8 % increase from baseline, p=0.02) and received less ephedrine (mean: 4 vs. 13 mg, p=0.048). The higher blood pressure and lower need of vasopressor following induction of anesthesia in the reclining compared to the sitting beach-chair position indicate more stable hemodynamics with the clinical implication that anesthesia should not be induced with the patient in the sitting position