• Emerg Med J · May 2022

    Randomized Controlled Trial Observational Study

    Biomechanical analysis of force distribution in one-handed and two-handed adult chest compression: a randomised crossover observational study.

    • Chia-Lung Kao, Jui-Yi Tsou, Ming-Yuan Hong, Chih-Jan Chang, and Chih-Hsien Chi.
    • Department of Emergency Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
    • Emerg Med J. 2022 May 1; 39 (5): 353-356.

    IntroductionThe standard method of chest compression for adults is a two-handed procedure. One-handed external chest compression (ECC) is used in some situations such as during transport of patients who had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, but the quality of one-handed ECC is still not well known. The distribution of force is related to the quality of chest compression and may affect the risk of injury. This study aimed to determine the differences in the quality and potential safety concern between one-handed ECC and two- handed ECC.MethodsIn this randomised crossover study, participants recruited from National Cheng Kung University Hospital and the ambulance team from the fire bureau were asked to perform one-handed and two-handed ECC on the Resusci Anne manikin according to standard 2015 ECC guidelines. The MatScan Pressure Measurement system was used to investigate the compression pressure and force distribution.ResultsTwo-handed ECC had better results than one-handed ECC in terms of the median (IQR) depth (51.00 (41.50-54.75) mm vs 42.00 (27.00-49.00) mm, p=0.018), the proportion of depth accuracy (82.05% (13.95%-99.86%) vs 11.17% (0.00%-42.13%), p=0.028) and the proportion of incomplete recoil (0.23% (0.01%-0.44%) vs 2.42% (0.60%-4.21%), p=0.002). The maximum force (45.72 (36.10-80.84) kgf vs 35.64 (24.13-74.34) kgf, p<0.001) and ulnar-radial force difference (7.13 (-16.58 to 21.07) kgf vs 23.93 (11.19-38.74) kgf, p<0.001) showed statistically significant differences. The perceived fatigue of two-handed ECC versus one-handed ECC was 5.00 (3.00-6.00) vs 6.00 (5.00-8.00), p<0.001.ConclusionThe quality of one-handed ECC, based on depth and recoil, is worse than that of standard two-handed ECC. The pressure and force distribution of one-handed ECC result in greater ulnar pronation of the hand than that of two-handed ECC. One-handed ECC more easily causes operator fatigue. Acknowledging these findings and adjusting training for one-handed ECC would potentially improve the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation during transport.© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…