• Emerg Med J · Jun 2014

    Web-based general public opinion study of automated versus manual external chest compression.

    • Frédéric Lapostolle, Philippe Bertrand, Jean-Marc Agostinucci, Catherine Pradeau, Karim Tazarourte, Mélanie Grave, Michel Galinski, and Frédéric Adnet.
    • AP-HP, Urgences-SAMU 93, Hôpital Avicenne, Bobigny, France Université Paris 13, Bobigny, France.
    • Emerg Med J. 2014 Jun 1;31(6):488-92.

    BackgroundOnly a few cardiac-arrest victims receive external chest compression (ECC) by a bystander.ObjectiveTo test the hypothesis that the general public might start ECC more often if they used an automated device rather than a manual massage.MethodsWeb-based public opinion survey based on two short videos, one showing manual ECC and the other automated ECC (Autopulse, Zoll, France). Advantages and disadvantages (perceived efficacy, reproducibility, hazard, apprehension and acceptability) of the two techniques were evaluated on a visual analogue scale (VAS). A VAS of 1-3 was considered to indicate preference for manual ECC, 8-10 for automated ECC and 4-7 for no clear preference. The final global score was the difference between advantage and disadvantage scores.ResultsOverall, 1769 persons answered the questionnaire. The median VAS score for each variable was as follows: 7 (25-75 percentiles, 5-9) for efficacy, 8 (3-10) for reproducibility, 5 (3-8) for hazard, 5 (2-8) for apprehension and 5 (2-8) for acceptability. The overall median score indicated that 1034 persons (58%) preferred use of the device, 618 (35%) preferred manual ECC and 117 (7%) had no preference. There was no significant difference in the preference according to gender, education and training in first aid. However, older persons (0) preferred the use of device.ConclusionsThe better 'advantages over disadvantages' score for the automated ECC device over manual ECC indicated that the general public might envisage use of the device. This could contribute to increase the frequency of resuscitation attempts by bystanders.Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

      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…