Drone-Facilitated Real-Time Video-Guided Feedback Helps to Improve the Quality of Lay Bystander Basic Life Support. A Randomized Controlled Simulation Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Telephone instructions are commonly used to improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by lay bystanders. This usually implies an audio but no visual connection between the provider and the emergency medical telecommunicator. We aimed to investigate whether video-guided feedback via a camera drone enhances the quality of CPR. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled simulation trial. Lay rescuers performed 8 min of CPR on an objective feedback manikin. Participants were randomized to receive telephone instructions with (intervention group) or without (control group) a drone providing a visual connection with the telecommunicator after a 2-min run-in phase. Performed work (total compression depth minus total lean depth) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of effective chest compressions, average compression depth, subjective physical strain measured every 2 min, and dexterity in the nine-hole peg test after the scenario. Outcomes were compared using the t- and Mann Whitney-U tests. A two-sided p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: We included 27 individuals (14 (52%) female, mean age 41 ± 14 years). Performed work was greater in the intervention than in the control group (41.3 ± 7.0 vs. 33.9 ± 10.9 m; absolute difference 7.5, 95% CI 1.4 to 14.8; p = 0.046), with higher average compression depth (49 ± 7 vs. 40 ± 13 mm; p = 0.041), and higher proportions of adequate chest compressions (43 (IQR 14-60) vs. 3 (0-29) %; p = 0.041). We did not find any significant differences regarding the remaining secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: Video-guided feedback via drones might be a helpful tool to enhance the quality of telephone-assisted CPR in lay bystanders.

Dispatchers impression plus Medical Priority Dispatch System reduced dispatch centre times in cases of out of hospital cardiac arrest. Pre-alert--a prospective, cluster randomized trial.

AIM OF THE STUDY: Dispatch centre processing times for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest or critically ill patients should be as short as possible. A modified 'pre-alert' dispatch workflow might be able to improve the processing time. METHODS: Between October 2010 and May 2011 dispatch events, suspicious for cardiac arrest, were prospectively randomized in 24h clusters. The emergency medical service of the intervention group got, based on the dispatchers impression, a 'pre-alert' alarm-message followed by the standard Medical Priority Dispatch System query whereas the control group did not. RESULTS: In 225 clusters 1500 events were eligible for analysis. Data are presented as median and 25-75 interquartile ranges. Per-protocol analysis demonstrated for the intervention group on 'pre-alert' days a median processing time of 143 s (109-187; n=256) versus 198 s (167-255; n=502) in the control group on non 'pre-alert' days, with a difference of 0.23 log-seconds (p<0.001; 95% CI 0.74-0.28). In critical ill patients, intention-to-treat analysis showed for the intervention group a median of 168 s (131-264; n=153) versus 239 s (176-309; n=164) in the control group, with a difference of 1.4 log-seconds (p<0.001; 95% CI 1.25-1.55). CONCLUSION: Dispatch times can effectively be reduced in cases of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest or critical ill patients with a 'pre-alert' dispatch workflow in combination with the Medical Priority Dispatch System protocol. This might play an important role in improving patient care.