Temporal analysis of continuous chest compression rate and depth performed by firefighters during out of hospital cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Quality of chest compressions (CC) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) often do not meet guideline recommendations for rate and depth. This may be due to the fatiguing nature of physically compressing a patient's chest, meaning that CPR quality reduces over time. OBJECTIVE: This analysis investigates the effect of CPR duration on the performance of continuous CCs delivered by firefighters equipped with CPR feedback devices. METHODS: Data were collected from a first responder group which used CPR feedback and automatic external defibrillator devices when attending out-of-hospital cardiac arrest events. Depth and rate of CC were analysed for 134 patients. Mean CC depth and rate were calculated every 5 s during two-minute episodes of CPR. Regression models were created to evaluate the relationship between applied CC depth and rate as a function of time. RESULTS: Mean (SD) CC depth during the investigation was 48 (9) mm. An inverse relationship was observed between CC depth and CPR duration, where CC depth decreased by 3.39 mm, over two-minutes of CPR (p < 0.001). Mean (SD) CC rate was 112.06 (5.87) compressions per minute. No significant relationship was observed between CC rate and CPR duration (p = 0.077). Mean depth was within guideline range for 33.58% of patient events, while guideline rate was observed in 92.54% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: A reduction in CC depth was observed during two-minutes of continuous CCs while CC rate was not affected. One third of patients received a mean CC depth within guideline range (50 to 60 mm).

Remote synchronous usability testing of public access defibrillators during social distancing in a pandemic.

Public access automated external defibrillators (AEDs) represent emergency medical devices that may be used by untrained lay-persons in a life-critical event. As such their usability must be confirmed through simulation testing. In 2020 the novel coronavirus caused a global pandemic. In order to reduce the spread of the virus, many restrictions such as social distancing and travel bans were enforced. Usability testing of AEDs is typically conducted in-person, but due to these restrictions, other usability solutions must be investigated. Two studies were conducted, each with 18 participants: (1) an in-person usability study of an AED conducted in an office space, and (2) a synchronous remote usability study of the same AED conducted using video conferencing software. Key metrics associated with AED use, such as time to turn on, time to place pads and time to deliver a shock, were assessed in both studies. There was no difference in time taken to turn the AED on in the in-person study compared to the remote study, but the time to place electrode pads and to deliver a shock were significantly lower in the in-person study than in the remote study. Overall, the results of this study indicate that remote user testing of public access defibrillators may be appropriate in formative usability studies for determining understanding of the user interface.