Cardiac ArrestNCT00380757
Comparison of Bystander Fatigue and CPR Quality When Using Two Different CPR Ratios.
A study testing bystander CPR using 30:2 ratio vs 15:2 ratio in people with Cardiac Arrest, run by Ottawa Hospital Research Institute at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
STUDY OBJECTIVES The overall goal of this study is to compare bystander fatigue and CPR quality after 5 minutes of the new 30:2 versus the old 15:2 chest compression to ventilation International Resuscitation Guidelines, in a population aged 55 or greater. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 55 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Cardiac Arrest
- What is being tested?
- bystander CPR using 30:2 ratio vs 15:2 ratio
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 42 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Jun 2006to Nov 2006
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 55 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Male or female aged 55 or older
- Must score 3 or less on the validated Clinical Frailty Scale 11
- Able to follow instructions in English or French
- Able to understand and give informed consent
Who cannot join
- Musculoskeletal condition precluding the ability to kneel down and perform CPR (e.g. severe arthritis, cast, wrist sprain, recent joint surgery)
- Cardiovascular condition precluding the ability to perform a moderate effort e.g. myocardial infarction or cardiovascular procedure in the last 3 months, recurrent angina, chest pain under investigation)
- Pulmonary condition precluding the ability to perform a moderate effort (e.g. emphysema, severe asthma, pneumonia)
- Active communicable disease e.g. tuberculosis, meningitis, gastro enteritis, hepatitis A or B, herpes simplex)
- Inability to perform chest compressions at appropriate rate and depth despite positive feedback during one to two-minute practice session
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Comparison of Bystander Fatigue and CPR Quality When Using the New 30:2 Versus the Old 15:2 Chest Compression to Ventilation International Guidelines: A Randomised Crossover Trial
STUDY OBJECTIVES The overall goal of this study is to compare bystander fatigue and CPR quality after 5 minutes of the new 30:2 versus the old 15:2 chest compression to ventilation International Resuscitation Guidelines, in a population aged 55 or greater.
More specifically, we will compare each CPR ratio with regard to:
Read more
- The achieved frequency and depth of chest compressions,
- Participant rating of their perceived level of exertion, and
- Resulting serum lactate levels in a subset of the participants.
STUDY HYPOTHESIS
In a population aged 55 or greater, the new 30:2 CPR ratio will lead to:
- less frequent and shallower chest compressions over the 5-minute study period;
- higher rating of perceived level of exertion; and
- higher serum lactate levels in a subset of participants when compared to the old 15:2 CPR ratio.
Read the detailed description
Background: Cardiac arrest is the number one cause of mortality in the Canadian population. Out-of-hospital bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is associated with a 3 to 4 fold increase in survival for cardiac arrest. Any interruption in the delivery of chest compressions to cardiac arrest victims is detrimental on survival. In an effort to minimize interruptions in chest compressions, the new International Guidelines changed the long-recommended 15:2 compression to ventilation ratio to 30:2. Although the 30:2 ratio is meant to increase survival for cardiac arrest, the ability of rescuers to deliver the new CPR ratio intervention has never been studied. Little is known about the potential impact of the new recommendations on bystander fatigue and resulting CPR quality.
Objectives: The overall goal of this study is to compare bystander fatigue and CPR quality after 5 minutes of the new 30:2 versus the old 15:2 chest compression to ventilation International Guidelines in a population aged 55 or greater.
More specifically, we will compare each CPR ratio with regard to:
- The achieved frequency and depth of chest compressions,
- Participant rating of their perceived level of exertion, and
- Resulting serum lactate levels in a subset of the participants.
Methods: We will conduct a randomized cross-over trial comparing bystander fatigue and CPR quality using two different CPR ratios. Intervention: All participants will be asked to perform two 5-minute sessions of CPR on a recording manikin - one session using the 30:2 ratio, the other using the 15:2 ratio. There will be a supervised practice session in the beginning, and resting periods in between. The order in which the sessions will be executed will be determined in a random fashion. The study population will consist of volunteers aged 55 or older, a group most susceptible to perform CPR on a real victim. The study will take place in a busy public area of The Ottawa Hospital, Civic Campus, between the cafeteria and the emergency department. Participants will have to score 3 or less on the validated Clinical Frailty Scale in order to participate in the study. Participants with physical limitations or disease processes precluding their ability to safely perform CPR will be excluded. Outcome measures: Information on age, gender, height, weight, prior CPR training, and measure of frailty will be collected at the time of enrollment. The number, frequency, and quality of chest compressions (depth and release) will be measured during each CPR session using a recording ResusciAnne manikin. Heart rate and blood pressure will be measured before and after each CPR sessions. The participants will be asked to rate their level of fatigue before and after each CPR session using the validated Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion scale. In addition, serum lactate levels will be determined before and after each CPR session in volunteers from the second group. Sample size: We hope to recruit 42 participants, among which 10 will have their lactate levels measured. Data analysis for Objective#1 and #3 will include descriptive statistics and a paired t-test with 95% confidence interval; Objective#2 will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and WIlcoxon Rank Sum test. In addition, we will perform a stepwise logistic regression analysis to control for the potential confounding effects of variables otherwise associated with bystander fatigue and CPR performance using both CPR ratio. This study protocol will receive ascent form the OHREB before implementation, and will be entered on the OHRI randomized trial registry.
Importance of the study Data from this study will evaluate bystander fatigue and resulting CPR quality when comparing the new 30:2 to the old 15:2 International Guidelines. This highly innovative project will improve our understanding of the physiological demands associated with the implementation of the new CPR International Guidelines. We anticipated the results from this study will be widely distributed, and will help shape the next iteration of the International Resuscitation Guidelines.
- Conditions
- Cardiac Arrest
- Being tested
- bystander CPR using 30:2 ratio vs 15:2 ratio
- Keywords
- cardiac arrest, CPR, resuscitation, fatigue, quality
- Medical subject headings
- Heart Arrest, Fatigue
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
bystander CPR using 30:2 ratio vs 15:2 ratioProcedure or surgery
Participants will use 2 CPR techniques with different chest compression to ventilation ratios
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| CPR 30:2 | Active comparator | 30 chest compressions to 2 ventilations Receives: Procedure: bystander CPR using 30:2 ratio vs 15:2 ratio |
| CPR 15:2 | Active comparator | 15 chest compressions to 2 ventilations Receives: Procedure: bystander CPR using 30:2 ratio vs 15:2 ratio |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
CPR Quality
Number of adequate chest compressions per minute
Measured: over a 5 minute period
Secondary outcomes (1)
Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion Blood Pressure Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion Scale
Measures of bystander fatigue measured using the Borg's Scale for Rating of Perceived Exertion (range 6-20) measured at baseline, following first CPR sequence, before beginning second sequence and at end of second CPR sequence. Lower values represent light perceived exertion, and higher values represent higher perceived exertion. Values reported are the difference between the baseline Borg Scale measured before beginning each CPR sequence and the Borg Scale following 5 minutes of each CPR sequence.
Measured: After 5 minutes of 15:2 CPR or 30:2 CPR
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Sep 2006 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2006
- Primary completionJul 2006
- Study completionNov 2006
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Cardiac ArrestStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Christian Vaillancourt, MD, Msc,, Principal investigator, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00380757
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2006347-01H
- Status last verified
- Apr 2025
- First submitted
- 23 Sep 2006
- Last updated
- 15 Apr 2025
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Vaillancourt C, Midzic I, Taljaard M, Chisamore B. Performer fatigue and CPR quality comparing 30:2 to 15:2 compression to ventilation ratios in older bystanders: A randomized crossover trial. Resuscitation. 2011 Jan;82(1):51-6. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.09.003. Epub 2010 Oct 14.
PubMed 20947241
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 15 Apr 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparison of Bystander Fatigue and CPR Quality When Using the New 30:2 Versus the Old 15:2 Chest Compression to Ventilation International Guidelines: A Randomised Crossover Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00380757
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2006347-01H
- Conditions
- Cardiac Arrest
- Keywords
- cardiac arrest, CPR, resuscitation, fatigue, quality
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Ottawa Hospital Research InstituteUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jun 2006 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jul 2006 (actual)
- Study completion
- Nov 2006 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Sep 2006 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 15 Apr 2025
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
STUDY OBJECTIVES The overall goal of this study is to compare bystander fatigue and CPR quality after 5 minutes of the new 30:2 versus the old 15:2 chest compression to ventilation International Resuscitation Guidelines, in a population aged 55 or greater.
More specifically, we will compare each CPR ratio with regard to:
- The achieved frequency and depth of chest compressions,
- Participant rating of their perceived level of exertion, and
- Resulting serum lactate levels in a subset of the participants.
STUDY HYPOTHESIS
In a population aged 55 or greater, the new 30:2 CPR ratio will lead to:
- less frequent and shallower chest compressions over the 5-minute study period;
- higher rating of perceived level of exertion; and
- higher serum lactate levels in a subset of participants when compared to the old 15:2 CPR ratio.
Detailed description
Background: Cardiac arrest is the number one cause of mortality in the Canadian population. Out-of-hospital bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is associated with a 3 to 4 fold increase in survival for cardiac arrest. Any interruption in the delivery of chest compressions to cardiac arrest victims is detrimental on survival. In an effort to minimize interruptions in chest compressions, the new International Guidelines changed the long-recommended 15:2 compression to ventilation ratio to 30:2. Although the 30:2 ratio is meant to increase survival for cardiac arrest, the ability of rescuers to deliver the new CPR ratio intervention has never been studied. Little is known about the potential impact of the new recommendations on bystander fatigue and resulting CPR quality.
Objectives: The overall goal of this study is to compare bystander fatigue and CPR quality after 5 minutes of the new 30:2 versus the old 15:2 chest compression to ventilation International Guidelines in a population aged 55 or greater.
More specifically, we will compare each CPR ratio with regard to:
- The achieved frequency and depth of chest compressions,
- Participant rating of their perceived level of exertion, and
- Resulting serum lactate levels in a subset of the participants.
Methods: We will conduct a randomized cross-over trial comparing bystander fatigue and CPR quality using two different CPR ratios. Intervention: All participants will be asked to perform two 5-minute sessions of CPR on a recording manikin - one session using the 30:2 ratio, the other using the 15:2 ratio. There will be a supervised practice session in the beginning, and resting periods in between. The order in which the sessions will be executed will be determined in a random fashion. The study population will consist of volunteers aged 55 or older, a group most susceptible to perform CPR on a real victim. The study will take place in a busy public area of The Ottawa Hospital, Civic Campus, between the cafeteria and the emergency department. Participants will have to score 3 or less on the validated Clinical Frailty Scale in order to participate in the study. Participants with physical limitations or disease processes precluding their ability to safely perform CPR will be excluded. Outcome measures: Information on age, gender, height, weight, prior CPR training, and measure of frailty will be collected at the time of enrollment. The number, frequency, and quality of chest compressions (depth and release) will be measured during each CPR session using a recording ResusciAnne manikin. Heart rate and blood pressure will be measured before and after each CPR sessions. The participants will be asked to rate their level of fatigue before and after each CPR session using the validated Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion scale. In addition, serum lactate levels will be determined before and after each CPR session in volunteers from the second group. Sample size: We hope to recruit 42 participants, among which 10 will have their lactate levels measured. Data analysis for Objective#1 and #3 will include descriptive statistics and a paired t-test with 95% confidence interval; Objective#2 will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and WIlcoxon Rank Sum test. In addition, we will perform a stepwise logistic regression analysis to control for the potential confounding effects of variables otherwise associated with bystander fatigue and CPR performance using both CPR ratio. This study protocol will receive ascent form the OHREB before implementation, and will be entered on the OHRI randomized trial registry.
Importance of the study Data from this study will evaluate bystander fatigue and resulting CPR quality when comparing the new 30:2 to the old 15:2 International Guidelines. This highly innovative project will improve our understanding of the physiological demands associated with the implementation of the new CPR International Guidelines. We anticipated the results from this study will be widely distributed, and will help shape the next iteration of the International Resuscitation Guidelines.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| CPR 30:2 | Active comparator | Procedure: bystander CPR using 30:2 ratio vs 15:2 ratio30 chest compressions to 2 ventilations |
| CPR 15:2 | Active comparator | Procedure: bystander CPR using 30:2 ratio vs 15:2 ratio15 chest compressions to 2 ventilations |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 55 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Male or female aged 55 or older
- Must score 3 or less on the validated Clinical Frailty Scale 11
- Able to follow instructions in English or French
- Able to understand and give informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Musculoskeletal condition precluding the ability to kneel down and perform CPR (e.g. severe arthritis, cast, wrist sprain, recent joint surgery)
- Cardiovascular condition precluding the ability to perform a moderate effort e.g. myocardial infarction or cardiovascular procedure in the last 3 months, recurrent angina, chest pain under investigation)
- Pulmonary condition precluding the ability to perform a moderate effort (e.g. emphysema, severe asthma, pneumonia)
- Active communicable disease e.g. tuberculosis, meningitis, gastro enteritis, hepatitis A or B, herpes simplex)
- Inability to perform chest compressions at appropriate rate and depth despite positive feedback during one to two-minute practice session
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| bystander CPR using 30:2 ratio vs 15:2 ratioParticipants will use 2 CPR techniques with different chest compression to ventilation ratios | Procedure or surgery | CPR 15:2, CPR 30:2 |
Primary outcome
CPR Quality
Time frame: over a 5 minute period
Number of adequate chest compressions per minute
1 secondary outcome
Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion Blood Pressure Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion Scale
Time frame: After 5 minutes of 15:2 CPR or 30:2 CPR
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 15 Apr 2025.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Results publication: PubMed 20947241Vaillancourt C, Midzic I, Taljaard M, Chisamore B. Performer fatigue and CPR quality comparing 30:2 to 15:2 compression to ventilation ratios in older bystanders: A randomized crossover trial. Resuscitation. 2011 Jan;82(1):51-6. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.09.003. Epub 2010 Oct 14.
Related trials for Cardiac Arrest
RecruitingObservational study
Observational Study of Cardiac Arrhythmias During Treatment With BTK Inhibitors or Venetoclax
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL), Waldenstr(SqrRoot)(Delta)m s Macroglobulinemia
Active, not recruiting
The REVIVE-PEEP Trial: Positive End-expiratory Pressure Versus Sham Valve/Zero End-expiratory Pressure in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation During Manual Ventilation to Improve Neurological Outcomes at Discharge in Adult Patients Suffering an Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest
Cardiac Arrest, Out-Of-Hospital
RecruitingObservational study
Accuracy of Doppler Ultrasound Versus Manual Palpation of Pulse in Cardiac Arrest
Cardiac Arrest
Active, not recruiting
RACE-CARS - RAndomized Cluster Evaluation of Cardiac ARrest Systems
Cardiac Arrest
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Therapeutic Outcomes of In-Hospital Resuscitation of Patients Admitted to the Internal Medicine Wards
Survival to Discharge With Good Neurologic Outcome Among in Hospital Cardiac Arrest Patients
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Christian Vaillancourt, MD, Msc, principal investigator
Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing bystander CPR using 30:2 ratio vs 15:2 ratio in people with Cardiac Arrest, run by Ottawa Hospital Research Institute at 1 site in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 Apr 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 15 Apr 2025). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
CPR Quality (time frame: over a 5 minute period). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00380757, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 15 Apr 2025.