Back to Search Start Over

Variability in chest compression rate calculations during pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Authors :
Landis WP
Morgan RW
Reeder RW
Graham K
Siems A
Diddle JW
Pollack MM
Maa T
Fernandez RP
Yates AR
Tilford B
Ahmed T
Meert KL
Schneiter C
Bishop R
Mourani PM
Naim MY
Friess S
Burns C
Manga A
Franzon D
Tabbutt S
McQuillen PS
Horvat CM
Bochkoris M
Carcillo JA
Huard L
Federman M
Sapru A
Viteri S
Hehir DA
Notterman DA
Holubkov R
Dean JM
Nadkarni VM
Berg RA
Wolfe HA
Sutton RM
Source :
Resuscitation [Resuscitation] 2020 Apr; Vol. 149, pp. 127-133. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Feb 20.
Publication Year :
2020

Abstract

Aim: The mathematical method used to calculate chest compression (CC) rate during cardiopulmonary resuscitation varies in the literature and across device manufacturers. The objective of this study was to determine the variability in calculated CC rates by applying four published methods to the same dataset.<br />Methods: This study was a secondary investigation of the first 200 pediatric cardiac arrest events with invasive arterial line waveform data in the ICU-RESUScitation Project (NCT02837497). Instantaneous CC rates were calculated during periods of uninterrupted CCs. The defined minimum interruption length affects rate calculation (e.g., if an interruption is defined as a break in CCs ≥ 2 s, the lowest possible calculated rate is 30 CCs/min). Average rates were calculated by four methods: 1) rate with an interruption defined as ≥ 1 s; 2) interruption ≥ 2 s; 3) interruption ≥ 3 s; 4) method #3 excluding top and bottom quartiles of calculated rates. American Heart Association Guideline-compliant rate was defined as 100-120 CCs/min. A clinically important change was defined as ±5 CCs/min. The percentage of events and epochs (30 s periods) that changed Guideline-compliant status was calculated.<br />Results: Across calculation methods, mean CC rates (118.7-119.5/min) were similar. Comparing all methods, 14 events (7%) and 114 epochs (6%) changed Guideline-compliant status.<br />Conclusion: Using four published methods for calculating CC rate, average rates were similar, but 7% of events changed Guideline-compliant status. These data suggest that a uniform calculation method (interruption ≥ 1 s) should be adopted to decrease variability in resuscitation science.<br /> (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1873-1570
Volume :
149
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Resuscitation
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
32088254
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.01.040