CPR Quality AssessmentNCT02231151
Visual Feedback of CPR: Does Point of View Matter?
A study testing The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individual in people with CPR Quality Assessment, run by KidSIM Simulation Program at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
The investigators will look at how accurate pediatric healthcare workers are at judging quality of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, by observation of the chest compressions, and if they are more accurate at a certain position near the patient. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- CPR Quality Assessment
- What is being tested?
- The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individual
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 125 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Oct 2014to Jan 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Pediatric acute care healthcare providers: such as nurses, nurse practitioners, respiratory therapists, physicians, residents, fellows
- Those who work in ER or ICU setting regularly or rotate through this setting
- Basic Life Support (BLS), Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) or Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) certification within the past two years
Who cannot join
- Anyone who has participated previously in the study
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Canada1 site
KidSim-Aspire Simulation Research Lab, Alberta Children's Hospital
Calgary, Alberta, T3B6A8
About this study
Official title: Providing Visual Feedback of Quality of CPR During Pediatric Cardiac Arrest: Does Point of View Matter?
The investigators will look at how accurate pediatric healthcare workers are at judging quality of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, by observation of the chest compressions, and if they are more accurate at a certain position near the patient. The investigators will do this by having participants fill out a survey about the quality of the Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in several recorded resuscitation scenarios.
Read the detailed description
Pediatric cardiac arrest leads to significant productive years lost, and has a huge emotional impact on families and caregivers. High quality CPR is the most important predictor for outcome in cardiac arrest. Human visual observation is commonly used and important to evaluate CPR quality. Interestingly, the accuracy of healthcare providers' visual assessment of CPR quality is unknown.
Primary Objective: To determine the accuracy of visual CPR assessment. Secondary Objective: 1) To identify the optimal position relative to the patient for accurate CPR assessment. 2) To determine health care practitioners' accuracy in identifying CPR errors.
Methods: We will videotape both good quality CPR and poor quality CPR in a simulated resuscitation. We will record 4 videos, one depicting high quality CPR, and 3 depicting the most common mistakes made when performing chest compressions, and these will be videotaped from the foot, head and side of the patient. Pediatric acute care professionals will be recruited to watch a randomized set of all 12 video clips, and fill out a brief and simple questionnaire on their assessment of the quality of the CPR being performed.
To assess the accuracy of the CPR quality, quantitative data on the quality of the CPR being performed during each of the 4 videotaped events will be captured and confirmed using a Laerdal CPRcard© (depth and rate) and the paediatric simulator SimJr© (recoil).
Operative definitions:
- Chest compression depth: defined as the maximum posterior deflection of the sternum prior to chest recoil. In order to be accurate a non-compressible surface must be beneath the patient. It is considered shallow is it is less than 50 mm and deep is greater than 60mm. Adequate chest compression depth is defined as being between 50-60 mm.
- Chest compression rate: defined as the frequency of chest compressions per minute. It is considered slow if less than 100 chest compressions are performed per minute, and too fast if greater than 120 compressions are performed per minute. This rate will be calculated during 60 seconds intervals while chest compressions are provided. Adequate chest compression rate is defined as being between 100 and 120 compressions per minute.
- Incomplete release of compressions/Recoil: defined as "leaning" phenomenon in which force is not completely removed during compressions. This is best reported by a simple binary measure: complete or incomplete (>2500g residual leaning force). Adequate recoil will be complete chest wall recoil.
Primary Outcome Measures: Proportion of healthcare providers who are accurate in their visual assessment of CPR quality.
Secondary Outcome Measures:
- Proportion of healthcare practitioners who accurately report CPR quality from position in relation to the patient (head, side and foot of bed).
- Proportion of healthcare practitioners accurately identifying CPR errors (rate, depth, recoil).
- Conditions
- CPR Quality Assessment
- Being tested
- The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individual
- Keywords
- CPR quality assessment, Visual CPR assessment, Position relative to patient
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individualBehavioural
Participants will be randomly assigned 12 videos to watch and rate the CPR quality of each. Investigators will be blind to the identity of the participants.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Pediatric Acute Care Professionals | Experimental | Individuals must work in ER or ICU setting regularly or rotate through this setting with up to date BLS/PALS/ACLS certification. The participants will be required to rate the CPR based on accuracy for each video shown. The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individuals will be randomized. Receives: Behavioral: The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individual |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Proportion of healthcare providers who are accurate in their visual assessment of CPR quality.
Measured: Data is anticipated to be presented 4 months after it is collected.
Secondary outcomes (2)
Proportion of healthcare practitioners who accurately report CPR quality from position in relation to the patient (head, side and foot of bed).
Measured: Data is anticipated to be presented 4 months after data is collected.
Proportion of healthcare practitioners accurately identifying CPR errors (rate, depth, recoil).
Measured: Data is anticipated to be presented about 4 months after it is collected.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Sep 2014 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2014
- Primary completionJan 2015
- Study completionJan 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for CPR Quality AssessmentStudies 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
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator
- Enrolment
- 125 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- KidSIM Simulation Program
- Sponsor type
- Research network
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Nicola Robertson, KidSIM Simulation Program
- Investigators
- Adam Cheng, MD, FRCPC, Principal investigator, University of Calgary
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02231151
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CPR Point of View
- Status last verified
- Aug 2015
- First submitted
- 22 Aug 2014
- Last updated
- 5 Aug 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Sutton R, Niles D, Nysaether J et al. Quantitative Analysis of CPR quality during in-hospital resuscitation of older children and adolescents. Pediatrics. 2009; 124 : 1930-8. Sutton R, Maltese M, Niles D et al. Quantitative analysis of chest compression interruption during in-hospital resuscitation of older children and adolescents. Resuscitation 2009; 80:1259-1263. Atkins DL et al. Epidemiology and Outcomes From Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Children: The Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Epistry-Cardiac Arrest. Circulation. 2009;119:1484-91. Atkins DL, Everson-Stewart S, Sears GK, Daya M, Osmond MH, Warden CR, Berg RA. Epidemiology and outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in children: the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Epistry-Cardiac Arrest. Circulation. 2009;119:1484-1491.
Jones A, Lin Y, Nettel-Aguirre A, Gilfoyle E, Cheng A. Visual assessment of CPR quality during pediatric cardiac arrest: does point of view matter? Resuscitation. 2015 May;90:50-5. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.01.036. Epub 2015 Feb 26.
PubMed 25727057
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Aug 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Providing Visual Feedback of Quality of CPR During Pediatric Cardiac Arrest: Does Point of View Matter?
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02231151
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CPR Point of View
- Conditions
- CPR Quality Assessment
- Keywords
- CPR quality assessment, Visual CPR assessment, Position relative to patient
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 125 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- KidSIM Simulation ProgramResearch network
- Study start
- Oct 2014
- Primary completion
- Jan 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jan 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 4 Sep 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The investigators will look at how accurate pediatric healthcare workers are at judging quality of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, by observation of the chest compressions, and if they are more accurate at a certain position near the patient. The investigators will do this by having participants fill out a survey about the quality of the Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in several recorded resuscitation scenarios.
Detailed description
Pediatric cardiac arrest leads to significant productive years lost, and has a huge emotional impact on families and caregivers. High quality CPR is the most important predictor for outcome in cardiac arrest. Human visual observation is commonly used and important to evaluate CPR quality. Interestingly, the accuracy of healthcare providers' visual assessment of CPR quality is unknown.
Primary Objective: To determine the accuracy of visual CPR assessment. Secondary Objective: 1) To identify the optimal position relative to the patient for accurate CPR assessment. 2) To determine health care practitioners' accuracy in identifying CPR errors.
Methods: We will videotape both good quality CPR and poor quality CPR in a simulated resuscitation. We will record 4 videos, one depicting high quality CPR, and 3 depicting the most common mistakes made when performing chest compressions, and these will be videotaped from the foot, head and side of the patient. Pediatric acute care professionals will be recruited to watch a randomized set of all 12 video clips, and fill out a brief and simple questionnaire on their assessment of the quality of the CPR being performed.
To assess the accuracy of the CPR quality, quantitative data on the quality of the CPR being performed during each of the 4 videotaped events will be captured and confirmed using a Laerdal CPRcard© (depth and rate) and the paediatric simulator SimJr© (recoil).
Operative definitions:
- Chest compression depth: defined as the maximum posterior deflection of the sternum prior to chest recoil. In order to be accurate a non-compressible surface must be beneath the patient. It is considered shallow is it is less than 50 mm and deep is greater than 60mm. Adequate chest compression depth is defined as being between 50-60 mm.
- Chest compression rate: defined as the frequency of chest compressions per minute. It is considered slow if less than 100 chest compressions are performed per minute, and too fast if greater than 120 compressions are performed per minute. This rate will be calculated during 60 seconds intervals while chest compressions are provided. Adequate chest compression rate is defined as being between 100 and 120 compressions per minute.
- Incomplete release of compressions/Recoil: defined as "leaning" phenomenon in which force is not completely removed during compressions. This is best reported by a simple binary measure: complete or incomplete (>2500g residual leaning force). Adequate recoil will be complete chest wall recoil.
Primary Outcome Measures: Proportion of healthcare providers who are accurate in their visual assessment of CPR quality.
Secondary Outcome Measures:
- Proportion of healthcare practitioners who accurately report CPR quality from position in relation to the patient (head, side and foot of bed).
- Proportion of healthcare practitioners accurately identifying CPR errors (rate, depth, recoil).
Study design
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- Single blind (investigator)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Pediatric Acute Care Professionals | Experimental | Behavioral: The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individualIndividuals must work in ER or ICU setting regularly or rotate through this setting with up to date BLS/PALS/ACLS certification. The participants will be required to rate the CPR based on accuracy for each video shown. The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individuals will be randomized. |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Pediatric acute care healthcare providers: such as nurses, nurse practitioners, respiratory therapists, physicians, residents, fellows
- Those who work in ER or ICU setting regularly or rotate through this setting
- Basic Life Support (BLS), Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) or Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) certification within the past two years
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Anyone who has participated previously in the study
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 |
|---|---|---|
| The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individualParticipants will be randomly assigned 12 videos to watch and rate the CPR quality of each. Investigators will be blind to the identity of the participants. | Behavioural | Pediatric Acute Care Professionals |
Primary outcome
Proportion of healthcare providers who are accurate in their visual assessment of CPR quality.
Time frame: Data is anticipated to be presented 4 months after it is collected.
2 secondary outcomes
Proportion of healthcare practitioners who accurately report CPR quality from position in relation to the patient (head, side and foot of bed).
Time frame: Data is anticipated to be presented 4 months after data is collected.
Proportion of healthcare practitioners accurately identifying CPR errors (rate, depth, recoil).
Time frame: Data is anticipated to be presented about 4 months after it is collected.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Aug 2015.
- BackgroundSutton R, Niles D, Nysaether J et al. Quantitative Analysis of CPR quality during in-hospital resuscitation of older children and adolescents. Pediatrics. 2009; 124 : 1930-8. Sutton R, Maltese M, Niles D et al. Quantitative analysis of chest compression interruption during in-hospital resuscitation of older children and adolescents. Resuscitation 2009; 80:1259-1263. Atkins DL et al. Epidemiology and Outcomes From Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Children: The Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Epistry-Cardiac Arrest. Circulation. 2009;119:1484-91. Atkins DL, Everson-Stewart S, Sears GK, Daya M, Osmond MH, Warden CR, Berg RA. Epidemiology and outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in children: the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Epistry-Cardiac Arrest. Circulation. 2009;119:1484-1491.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 25727057Jones A, Lin Y, Nettel-Aguirre A, Gilfoyle E, Cheng A. Visual assessment of CPR quality during pediatric cardiac arrest: does point of view matter? Resuscitation. 2015 May;90:50-5. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.01.036. Epub 2015 Feb 26.
Related trials for CPR Quality Assessment
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Self-training and Resuscitation Techniques: Evaluation of the Performance and Impact on the Quality of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR)
Cardiac Arrest (CA)
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Pulse Detection in Cardiac Arrest Patients Using a Doppler Ultrasound Patch on the Carotid Artery
Cardiac Arrest (CA), Return of Spontaneous Circulation
RecruitingObservational study
Pain After Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation (PAINCARE)
Pain, Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA)
Recruiting
Enhanced Community First Responder System Evaluation in Singapore
Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest
Recruiting
Effect of Bed Height on Chest Compression Quality and Provider Biomechanics During Pediatric CPR Simulation
Pediatric Cardiac Arrest (Simulated), Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, Simulation Training
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.
Adam Cheng, MD, FRCPC principal investigator
University of Calgary
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individual in people with CPR Quality Assessment, run by KidSIM Simulation Program 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 3 inclusion and 1 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 5 Aug 2015. 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
Proportion of healthcare providers who are accurate in their visual assessment of CPR quality. (time frame: Data is anticipated to be presented 4 months after it is collected.). 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 NCT02231151, which also lists 2 linked publications.
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 5 Aug 2015.