INTRODUCTIONThere is a need for a simple-to-use and easy-to-carry CPR feedback device for laypersons. We aimed to determine if a novel CPRcard™ feedback device improved the quality of chest compressions.

METHODSWe compared participants' chest compression rate and depth with and without feedback. Compression data was captured through the CPRcard™ or Resusci Anne's SimPad® SkillReporter™. Compression quality was defined based on 2010 international guidelines for rate, depth and flow fraction.

RESULTSOverall, the CPRcard group achieved a better median compression rate (CPRcard 117 vs. control 122, p = 0.001) and proportion of compressions within the adequate rate range (CPRcard 83% vs. control 47%, p < 0.001). Compared to the no-card and blinded-card groups, the CPRcard group had a higher proportion of adequate compression rate (CPRcard 88% vs. no-card 46.8%, p = 0.037; CPRcard 73% vs. blinded-card 43%, p = 0.003). Proportion of compressions with adequate depth was similar in all groups (CPRcard 52% vs. control 48%, p = 0.957). The CPRcard group more often met targets for compression rate of 100-120/min and depth of at least 5 cm (CPRcard 36% vs. control 4%, p = 0.022). Chest compression flow fraction rate was similar but not statistically significant in all groups (92%, p = 1.0). Respondents using the CPRcard expressed higher confidence (mean 2.7 ± 2.4; 1 = very confident, 10 = not confident).

CONCLUSIONUse of the CPRcard by non-healthcare workers in simulated resuscitation improved the quality of chest compressions, thus boosting user confidence in performing compressions.

INTRODUCTIONVictims of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests require timely cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and early defibrillation. Callers to emergency medical services are asked to provide dispatcher-guided responses until an ambulance arrives. Knowing what to expect in such circumstances should reduce both delay and confusion.

METHODSThis study was conducted among schoolchildren aged 11-17 years using ten-item pre- and post-training surveys. We aimed to observe any knowledge and attitude shifts regarding CPR and automated external defibrillator (AED) use subsequent to the training.

RESULTSA total of 1,196 students across five schools completed the pre- and post-training surveys. Survey questions tested basic CPR knowledge and attitudes towards CPR and AED use. The overall response rate was 80.8% and 81.5% in the pre- and post-training surveys, respectively. There was a statistically significant improvement in the students' CPR knowledge. The number of students who selected all the correct answers for the knowledge-based questions in the post-training survey increased by 64.7% (95% confidence interval 61.9%-67.5%; p < 0.001). There was also an improvement in their willingness to administer CPR (likely/very likely to administer CPR pre-training vs. post-training: 13.0% vs. 71.0%; p < 0.001) and use AED (likely/very likely to administer AED pre-training vs. post-training: 11.7% vs. 78.0%; p < 0.001) after training.

CONCLUSIONThe training programme imparted new information and skills, and improved attitudes towards providing CPR and using AED. However, some concerns persisted about hurting the victim while performing CPR.