Validation of a Monitoring System for CPR Quality in a Manikin Model.
- Author:
Sue Yeol LEE
1
;
Gyu Chong CHO
;
Ki Hoon CHOI
;
Ji Yun AHN
;
Jung Yeol SEO
;
You Dong SHON
;
Hee Cheol AHN
Author Information
1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Hallym University Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. emdrcho@empal.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation;
Quality assurance;
Health care;
Physiologic monitoring
- MeSH:
Bias (Epidemiology);
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation;
Deception;
Delivery of Health Care;
Floors and Floorcoverings;
Manikins;
Monitoring, Physiologic;
Resuscitation;
Thorax
- From:Journal of the Korean Society of Emergency Medicine
2009;20(6):629-634
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: The 2005 resuscitation guidelines stipulate the need for monitoring CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) quality. Recently, several clinical investigations have shown that a real time monitoring and feedback system is effective for improving the quality of chest compressions during resuscitation. However little data exists regarding the accuracy of the monitoring system using an accelerometer sensor and a pressure sensor for the measuring of compression rate and depth. Our goal for this study was to investigate how well chest compression rate and depth can be estimated using the monitoring system. METHODS: Thirty seconds of continuous chest compressions were delivered on a standard skillmeter manikin lying on the floor with the monitoring system. The chest compressions were delivered with variations in compression rate (67~142 /min) and with variations in compression depth (22~61 mm). A total of 120 sets of compressions were delivered for validation of rate and depth. RESULTS: The correlation coefficient for compression rate between the monitoring system and the standard method was 0.999 (p<0.001), and Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean bias of -0.10+/-0.77/min, with limits of agreement ranging from -1.60 to 1.40 /min. The correlation coefficient for compression depth between two methods was 0.983 (p<0.001), and Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean bias of 4.2+/-2.0 mm, with limits of agreement ranging from 0.24 to 8.10 mm. CONCLUSION: Compared with a skillmeter manikin, a monitoring system for the quality of CPR estimates chest compression rate precisely, but overestimates chest compression depth by an average of 10.3%.
