scholarly journals BLS ERC Certified Greek Providers’ Willingness to Perform CPR and Skill Retention During the Covid-19 Pandemic. A Survey of the Hellenic Society of Cardiology (WG CPR)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Latsios ◽  
Andreas Synetos ◽  
Marianna Leopoulou ◽  
Evaggelia Stamatopoulou ◽  
Panagiotis Koukopoulos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Support ◽  
Negative Attitude ◽  
Behavioral Changes ◽  
European Resuscitation Council ◽  
Skill Retention ◽  
Electronic Survey ◽  
Public Health Organization ◽  
National Public Health ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
External Defibrillator

Abstract Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate a. the level of established knowledge regarding cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during the Covid-19 pandemic era of certified Basic Life Support (BLS) providers and b. their attitude towards CPR, along with possible misconceptions regarding Covid-19. Methods: Certified BLS providers from courses held in Athens, Greece were asked to complete an electronic survey regarding their knowledge and behavioral changes on performing CPR on victims with confirmed or suspected Covid-19 infection. Their perception on BLS courses was also assessed. Answers were collected during June 2020. Results: Out of 5513 certified providers, 25.53% completed the survey. The majority (83.36%) would provide CPR to an arrest victim with possible or confirmed Covid-19 infection. Regarding the use of an automated external defibrillator, the majority thinks that it is equally safe as in the pre-Covid-19 period (58.24%). Older age (<0.001) and a lower level of education (p<0.001) made rescuers more willing to provide CPR. Exposure to the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) (p<0.001) and to a lesser degree to Greek National Public Health Organization (NPHO) guidelines was also correlated to a less negative attitude towards resuscitation, whereas time since the last BLS seminar had no such impact (p=0.18). All responders agree that training in CPR during Covid-19 remains necessary.Conclusion: Certified BLS providers maintain willingness to perform CPR in unresponsive victims even during the Covid-19 pandemic era. This attitude is reinforced by exposure to the updated CPR guidelines. Knowledge regarding Covid-19 CPR is satisfactory, with more training focused on the revised algorithms considered essential.

Abstract 139: Does Simplification of Guidelines Improve Retention of BLS Skills 3 Months After Training?

Circulation ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 140 (Suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dung T Nguyen ◽  
Kasper G Lauridsen ◽  
Josephine Johnsen ◽  
Kristian Krogh ◽  
Bo Løfgren
Keyword(s):  
Life Support ◽  
European Resuscitation Council ◽  
Shock Delivery ◽  
Adherence To Guidelines ◽  
Skill Retention ◽  
Video Recordings ◽  
Correct Sequence ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Male Sex ◽  
Simplified Algorithm

Background: The European Resuscitation Council (ERC) 2015 basic life support (BLS) guidelines introduced a simplified algorithm compared to the ERC 2010 BLS guidelines. This was intended to improve adherence to guidelines and retention of skills. This study aimed to compare the retention of BLS skills 3 months after training using the ERC 2010 or 2015 guidelines. Methods: This was an observational study including video recordings of laypersons being skill tested 3 months after participation in a standardized ERC BLS/AED course using either the ERC 2010 guidelines or the simplified ERC 2015 guidelines. The endpoints were 1) remembering the correct sequence of BLS/AED algorithm, 2) remembering the correct sequence of the BLS/AED algorithm and performing all skills correctly, 3) time to: emergency medical service (EMS) call, first compression, and shock delivery. Results: We analyzed videos of 133 laypersons skill tested 3 months after initial training; 64 trained using the 2010 guidelines (mean ±standard deviation (SD) age: 40 ±11 years, male sex: 19 (30%)) and 69 trained using the 2015 guidelines (age: 44 ±10 years, male sex: 36 (52%)). Participants in the 2015 guidelines group improved the retention of the BLS/AED algorithm compared to the 2010 guidelines group (29 (42%) vs. 10 (16%), relative risk (RR): 2.7 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.4 - 5.1) P=0.001). Both BLS/AED algorithm and all skills were correctly performed by 13 (19%) vs. 3 (5%) (RR: 4.0 (95% CI: 1.2 - 13.5) P=0.01) in the 2015 and 2010 groups respectively. No significant difference was found in time to EMS call (difference: 3 sec (95% CI: -2 - 9 sec) P=0.27), time to first compression (difference: 4 sec, (95% CI: -3 - 10 sec) P=0.28), and time to first shock (difference: 4 sec (95% CI: -5 - 14 sec) P=0.33) between the groups. Conclusion: BLS/AED training using ERC 2015 guidelines was associated with better skill retention compared to training using ERC 2010 guidelines. There was no difference in time to EMS call, first compression, or shock delivery.

scholarly journals New guidelines for resuscitation in adults

Medicina ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 79
Author(s):  
Dinas Vaitkaitis ◽  
Vidas Pilvinis ◽  
Andrius Pranskūnas ◽  
Nedas Jasinskas ◽  
Paulius Dobožinskas
Keyword(s):  
Basic Life Support ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Sudden Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Heart Association ◽  
European Resuscitation Council ◽  
Resuscitation Guidelines ◽  
New Guidelines ◽  
Cardiovascular Care ◽  
Foreign Body Airway Obstruction ◽  
External Defibrillator

Five years after the last issue of the guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care, in 2005 American Heart Association and European Resuscitation Council published new guidelines. In this review, basic life support (BLS) technique, indications for use of an automated external defibrillator (AED), recognition of sudden cardiac arrest, and management of choking (foreign-body airway obstruction) are presented according to the “Resuscitation Guidelines 2005.”

scholarly journals A summative assessment of theoretical and practical competencies in BLS-AED-An empirical research methodology to obtain quantitative results

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 65
Author(s):  
Jordi Castillo García ◽  
Carmen Gomar Sancho ◽  
Encarnación Rodríguez Higueras ◽  
Joan Maria Estrada Masllorens ◽  
Alberto Gallart Fernández-Puebla
Keyword(s):  
Basic Life Support ◽  
Life Support ◽  
Summative Assessment ◽  
High Fidelity ◽  
European Resuscitation Council ◽  
Global Competency ◽  
Quantitative Results ◽  
Training Courses ◽  
Multiple Choice Questionnaire ◽  
External Defibrillator

Background and objective: The evaluation in basic life support (BLS) and automated external defibrillator (AED) training courses is mostly formative. The objective of the study was to evaluate a quantitative assessment with an established cut-off level of 7 out of 10.Methods: The course was designed in accordance with the European Resuscitation Council (ERC). For the evaluation a high-fidelity manikin was available (Laerdal® Resusci Anne QCPR). A multiple-choice questionnaire (MCQ) was used to test knowledge, and the practical skills with a high-fidelity manikin.Results: About 68.2% and 34.1% obtained a score greater than 7 in knowledge and skills as evaluated by the nurse educator, immediately after the training. When the skills illustrated by the manikin were included, the results fell to 11.4% and 2.3%, respectively.Conclusions: A summative assessment of theoretical and practical competencies with a cut-off level of 7 demonstrates that global competency in BLS-AED is not achieved and some other strategies should be introduced in the current courses.

scholarly journals European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Adult advanced life support

Resuscitation ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jasmeet Soar ◽  
Bernd W. Böttiger ◽  
Pierre Carli ◽  
Keith Couper ◽  
Charles D. Deakin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Life Support ◽  
Advanced Life Support ◽  
European Resuscitation Council

Abstract 01: Dispatching Lay Rescuers Through a Smartphone Application is Associated With Increased Bystander Defibrillation in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Circulation ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 138 (Suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linn Andelius ◽  
Carolina Malta Hansen ◽  
Freddy Lippert ◽  
Lena Karlsson ◽  
Christian Torp-Pedersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Arrest ◽  
Smartphone Application ◽  
Automated External Defibrillator ◽  
Early Defibrillation ◽  
Emergency Medical Dispatch ◽  
Capital Region ◽  
Electronic Survey ◽  
Emergency Medical ◽  
Hospital Cardiac Arrest ◽  
External Defibrillator

Introduction: Survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is dependent on early defibrillation. To increase bystander defibrillation in OHCAs, a first-responder program dispatching lay rescuers (Heart Runners) through a smartphone application (Heart Runner-app) was implemented in the Capital Region of Denmark. We investigated the proportion of Heart Runners arriving prior to the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and rates of bystander defibrillation. Methods: The Capital Region of Denmark comprises 1.8 mil. inhabitants and 19,048 Heart Runners were registered. In cases of suspected OHCA, the Heart Runner-app was activated by the Emergency Medical Dispatch Center. Up to 20 Heart Runners < 1.8 km from the OHCA were dispatched to either start cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) or to retrieve and use a publicly accessible automated external defibrillator (AED). Through an electronic survey, Heart Runners reported if they arrived before EMS and if they applied an AED. OHCAs where at least one Heart Runner arrived before EMS were compared with OHCAs where EMS arrived first. All OHCAs from September 2017 to May 2018, where Heart Runners had been dispatched, were included. Results: Of 399 EMS treated OHCAs, 78% (n=313/399) had a matching survey. A Heart Runner arrived before EMS in 47% (n=147/313) of the cases, and applied an AED in 41% (n=61/147) of these cases. Rate of bystander defibrillation was 2.5-fold higher compared to cases where the EMS arrived first (Table 1). Conclusions: By activation of the Heart Runner-app, Heart Runners arrived prior to EMS in nearly half of all the OHCA cases. Bystander defibrillation rate was significantly higher when Heart Runners arrived prior to EMS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document