Abstract ▼ AI-Helper

Purpose: This study aimed to propose an effective one-rescuer infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) chest compression technique by comparing the differences in efficacy, convenience, and pain levels between the two thumb-encircling and two finger techniques. Methods: Subjects were randomized to...

Purpose: This study aimed to propose an effective one-rescuer infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) chest compression technique by comparing the differences in efficacy, convenience, and pain levels between the two thumb-encircling and two finger techniques. Methods: Subjects were randomized to perform either two-thumb-encircling or two-finger technique for 8 minutes each on infant CPR manikins. After the chest compression, a survey was administered to the subjects to measure convenience and pain levels according to compression method. Results: Total compression depth over 8 minutes was significantly deeper for the two-thum-encircling technique ($43.5{\pm}4.8mm$) compared with the two-finger technique ($32.6{\pm}5.4mm$) (p<0.001). In terms of compression depth measured at 1-minute intervals, compression depth with the two-finger technique decreased from $38.3{\pm}4.23mm$ to $29.0{\pm}6.79mm$, whereas compression depth with the two-thumb-encircling technique did not show a significant change (from $43.7{\pm}4.12mm$ to $43.4{\pm}5mm$). The results of the survey indicated that, the majority of subjects found the two-thumb-encircling technique to be the most comfortable technique for compression depth (n=29, 64.4%). The majority of subjects (n=31, 68.9%) answered that the two-finger technique resulted in the most pain. Conclusion: Comparison of efficacy of the two-thumb-encircling and two-finger-techniques in the performance of one-rescuer infant CPR revealed that the two-thumb-encircling technique was more effective in maintaining chest compression depth.

주제어