ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02231151Updated Aug 5, 2015

Visual Feedback of CPR: Does Point of View Matter?

An interventional study of The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individual in CPR Quality Assessment, sponsored by KidSIM Simulation Program. Completed at 1 site in Canada. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2015-08-05.

Sponsored by KidSIM Simulation Program · Not applicable and Interventional

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
125
Allocation
Not applicable
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The investigators will look at how accurate pediatric healthcare workers are at judging quality of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation, by observation of the chest compressions, and if they are more accurate at a certain position near the patient. The investigators will do this by having participants fill out a survey about the quality of the Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in several recorded resuscitation scenarios.

Read the detailed description

Pediatric cardiac arrest leads to significant productive years lost, and has a huge emotional impact on families and caregivers. High quality CPR is the most important predictor for outcome in cardiac arrest. Human visual observation is commonly used and important to evaluate CPR quality. Interestingly, the accuracy of healthcare providers' visual assessment of CPR quality is unknown.

Primary Objective: To determine the accuracy of visual CPR assessment. Secondary Objective: 1) To identify the optimal position relative to the patient for accurate CPR assessment. 2) To determine health care practitioners' accuracy in identifying CPR errors.

Methods: We will videotape both good quality CPR and poor quality CPR in a simulated resuscitation. We will record 4 videos, one depicting high quality CPR, and 3 depicting the most common mistakes made when performing chest compressions, and these will be videotaped from the foot, head and side of the patient. Pediatric acute care professionals will be recruited to watch a randomized set of all 12 video clips, and fill out a brief and simple questionnaire on their assessment of the quality of the CPR being performed.

To assess the accuracy of the CPR quality, quantitative data on the quality of the CPR being performed during each of the 4 videotaped events will be captured and confirmed using a Laerdal CPRcard© (depth and rate) and the paediatric simulator SimJr© (recoil).

Operative definitions:

  1. Chest compression depth: defined as the maximum posterior deflection of the sternum prior to chest recoil. In order to be accurate a non-compressible surface must be beneath the patient. It is considered shallow is it is less than 50 mm and deep is greater than 60mm. Adequate chest compression depth is defined as being between 50-60 mm.
  2. Chest compression rate: defined as the frequency of chest compressions per minute. It is considered slow if less than 100 chest compressions are performed per minute, and too fast if greater than 120 compressions are performed per minute. This rate will be calculated during 60 seconds intervals while chest compressions are provided. Adequate chest compression rate is defined as being between 100 and 120 compressions per minute.
  3. Incomplete release of compressions/Recoil: defined as "leaning" phenomenon in which force is not completely removed during compressions. This is best reported by a simple binary measure: complete or incomplete (>2500g residual leaning force). Adequate recoil will be complete chest wall recoil.

Primary Outcome Measures: Proportion of healthcare providers who are accurate in their visual assessment of CPR quality.

Secondary Outcome Measures:

  1. Proportion of healthcare practitioners who accurately report CPR quality from position in relation to the patient (head, side and foot of bed).
  2. Proportion of healthcare practitioners accurately identifying CPR errors (rate, depth, recoil).
02

Conditions studied

  • CPR Quality Assessment

Keywords

  • CPR quality assessment
  • Visual CPR assessment
  • Position relative to patient
03

In context

Lead sponsor

KidSIM Simulation Program is the lead sponsor of 10 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Pediatric acute care healthcare providers: such as nurses, nurse practitioners, respiratory therapists, physicians, residents, fellows
  2. Those who work in ER or ICU setting regularly or rotate through this setting
  3. Basic Life Support (BLS), Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) or Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) certification within the past two years

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Anyone who has participated previously in the study
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
Single (Investigator)
Enrollment
125 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Pediatric Acute Care Professionals

    Individuals must work in ER or ICU setting regularly or rotate through this setting with up to date BLS/PALS/ACLS certification. The participants will be required to rate the CPR based on accuracy for each video shown. The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individuals will be randomized.

    Behavioral: The type of CPR error(s) shown to the individual

Interventions

  • BehavioralThe type of CPR error(s) shown to the individual

    Participants will be randomly assigned 12 videos to watch and rate the CPR quality of each. Investigators will be blind to the identity of the participants.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Proportion of healthcare providers who are accurate in their visual assessment of CPR quality.

    Time frame: Data is anticipated to be presented 4 months after it is collected.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Proportion of healthcare practitioners who accurately report CPR quality from position in relation to the patient (head, side and foot of bed).

    Time frame: Data is anticipated to be presented 4 months after data is collected.

  2. Proportion of healthcare practitioners accurately identifying CPR errors (rate, depth, recoil).

    Time frame: Data is anticipated to be presented about 4 months after it is collected.

07

Study locations

1 site
  • KidSim-Aspire Simulation Research Lab, Alberta Children's Hospital
    Calgary, Alberta T3B6A8, Canada
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Sutton R, Niles D, Nysaether J et al. Quantitative Analysis of CPR quality during in-hospital resuscitation of older children and adolescents. Pediatrics. 2009; 124 : 1930-8. Sutton R, Maltese M, Niles D et al. Quantitative analysis of chest compression interruption during in-hospital resuscitation of older children and adolescents. Resuscitation 2009; 80:1259-1263. Atkins DL et al. Epidemiology and Outcomes From Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Children: The Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Epistry-Cardiac Arrest. Circulation. 2009;119:1484-91. Atkins DL, Everson-Stewart S, Sears GK, Daya M, Osmond MH, Warden CR, Berg RA. Epidemiology and outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in children: the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Epistry-Cardiac Arrest. Circulation. 2009;119:1484-1491.
  • Jones A, Lin Y, Nettel-Aguirre A, Gilfoyle E, Cheng A. Visual assessment of CPR quality during pediatric cardiac arrest: does point of view matter? Resuscitation. 2015 May;90:50-5. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.01.036. Epub 2015 Feb 26. PubMed 25727057 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 5, 2015, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02231151
Lead sponsor
KidSIM Simulation Program
Responsible party
Nicola Robertson (KidSim Aspire Coordinator, KidSIM Simulation Program) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 4, 2014
Start date
Oct 2014
Primary completion
Jan 2015
Completion
Jan 2015
Last update
Aug 5, 2015

Study contacts

Adam Cheng, MD, FRCPC
principal investigator · University of Calgary

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2015. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion