Abstract:Background: App-linked real-time feedback-devices for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) aim to improve laypersons' resuscitation quality. Resuscitation guidelines recommend these technologies in training settings. This is the first study comparing resuscitation quality of all App-linked feedback-devices currently on market. Methods: A prospective randomised simulation study was performed. After standardised instructions, participants performed 2-minutes compression-only CPR on a manikin without feedback (baseline). Afterwards, participants performed 4 × 2 min CPR with four different feedback devices in randomised order (CorPatch® Trainer, CPRBAND AIO Training, SimCPR®ProTrainer, Relay Response™) (intervention). CPR metrics (chest compression depth (CD), chest compression rate (CR), percentage of correct CD/CR (%), correct hand position, correct chest recoil, and technical preparation-time) were assessed. Devices data were compared to the baseline group using Wilcoxon testing with IBM SPSS (primary outcome). Differences between devices were analysed with ANOVA testing (secondary outcome). Normally distributed data were described as mean ± standard deviation (SD) and non-normally distributed data as Median [Interquartile range (IQR). CPR self-confidence was measured by means of questionnaire before and after feedback devices' use. Comparison was performed by students t-test. Results: Forty participants were involved. SimCPR®ProTrainer was the only device, which resulted in guideline-compliant chest compressions (Mean ± SD:5.37 ± 0.76) with improved chest compression depth (p < 0.001), and percentage of correct chest compression depth (p < 0.001) compared to unassisted CPR (baseline). CorPatch® Trainer as the only device with audio-visual recoil instructions resulted in improved chest recoil (Mean ± SD:72.25 ± 24.89) compared to baseline (Mean ± SD:49.00 ± 42.20; p < 0.01), while the other three devices resulted in significantly lower chest recoil rates (CPRBAND AIO Training: 37.03 ± 39.90; p < 0.01, SimCPR®ProTrainer: Mean ± SD:39.88 ± 36.50; p = 0.03, Relay Response™: Mean ± SD:36.88 ± 37.73; p = 0.02). CPR quality when using the different feedback devices differ in chest compression depth (p = 0.02), chest compression rate (p < 0.001), percentage of correct chest compression depth/rate (p = 0.03/p = 0.04), and technical preparation-time (p < 0.001). Feedback-devices' use increased participant's CPR self-confidence (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Although, CPR feedback devices show improved CPR performance in layperson in some metrics, none of the tested CPR feedback devices supported layperson in overall adequate CPR performance. More and better technical functionality is necessary, to fully utilise the potential of CPR feedback devices and to prevent a worsening of CPR performance when layperson use this technology.

Clinical Study The Usefulness of Confusion , Urea , Respiratory Rate , and Shock Index or Adjusted Shock Index Criteria in Predicting Combined Mortality and / or ICU Admission Compared to CURB-65 in Community-Acquired Pneumonia

PCR analysis of the STR HUMF13A01 in a population sample of central Italy.

[Role of German cardiac arrest centers in mediating basic life support]

Developing and Testing a Protocol for Managing Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation of Patients with Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19: In Situ Simulation Study

Dissemination of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Training for Nurses Treating Coronavirus Disease-2019 Patients: A Single-arm Pre-experimental Study

Resuscitation (un-)wanted: Does anyone care? A retrospective real data analysis

Practice of Extracorporeal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in China after Publication of the 2015 AHA Guidelines for Resuscitation: a Multiinstitution Survey

1909 Evaluation of awareness and implementation of DNACPR decisions in trauma and orthopaedic Surgery

Influences on the duration and success of out-of-hospital resuscitation of geriatric patients over 80 years of age - a retrospective evaluation

Comparison of blended e-learning and face-to-face-only education for resuscitation training in German schools - A cluster randomized-controlled prospective study

Do laypersons need App-linked real-time feedback devices for effective resuscitation? - Results of a prospective, randomised simulation trial

Impact of foeto-maternal resuscitation and perimortem caesarean section simulation training: An opinion survey of healthcare participants

Willingness and Barriers to Undertaking Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Reported by Medical Students after the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic—Single-Center Study

2021 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations

Interprofessional In Situ Simulation's Impact on Healthcare Personnel's Competence and Reported Need for Training in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation—A Pilot Study in Norway

German Cardiac Arrest Registry (G-CAR)-results of the pilot phase

Effects of an Experimental Contact Lens Disinfectant on Rabbit Corneal Epithelium Cultures

Successful treatment of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is still based on quick activation of the chain of survival

The impact of smartphone-dispatched CPR-trained volunteers on OHCA outcomes is influenced by patient age

Development, implementation, and refinement of a comprehensive postcardiac arrest care training course in Japan

Innovative Regional Services and Heterogeneous Communication Channels: Results from the Nationwide German egePan Project for Pandemic Management