Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2016 Dec;23(6):418-424.
doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000338.

Interactive videoconferencing versus audio telephone calls for dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation using the ALERT algorithm: a randomized trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Interactive videoconferencing versus audio telephone calls for dispatcher-assisted cardiopulmonary resuscitation using the ALERT algorithm: a randomized trial

Samuel Stipulante et al. Eur J Emerg Med. 2016 Dec.

Abstract

Objectives: The ALERT algorithm, a telephone cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) protocol, has been shown to help bystanders initiate CPR. Mobile phone communications may play a role in emergency calls and improve dispatchers' understanding of the rescuer's situation. However, there is currently no validated protocol for videoconference-assisted CPR (v-CPR). We initiated this study to validate an original protocol of v-CPR and to evaluate the potential benefit in comparison with classical telephone-CPR (t-CPR).

Materials and methods: We developed an algorithm for v-CPR, adapted from the ALERT t-CPR protocol. A total of 180 students were recruited from secondary school and assigned randomly either to t-CPR or to v-CPR. A manikin was used to evaluate CPR performance.

Results: The mean chest compression rate was higher in the v-CPR group (v-CPR: 110±16 vs. t-CPR: 86±28; P<0.0001), whereas depth was comparable between both groups (v-CPR: 48±13 vs. t-CPR: 47±16 mm; P=0.64). Hand positioning was correct in 91.7% with v-CPR, but only 68% with t-CPR (P=0.001). There was almost no 'hands-off' period in the v-CPR group [v-CPR: 0 (0-0.4) vs. t-CPR: 7 (0-25.5) s; P<0.0001], but the median no-flow time was increased in the v-CPR group [v-CPR: 146 (128-173.5) vs. t-CPR: 122 (105-143.5) s, P<0.0001]. The overall score of CPR performance was improved in the v-CPR group (P<0.001).

Conclusion: The v-CPR protocol allows bystanders to reach compression rates and depths close to guidelines and to reduce 'hands-off' events during CPR.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types