ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT05908500Updated Jun 4, 2025

Gathering Evidence on Best Practices for Lay Rescuer CPR Training

An interventional study of CPR Training and CPR Manikin Type in Cardiac Arrest, Out-Of-Hospital, sponsored by University of Nevada, Reno. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in United States. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-06-04.

Sponsored by University of Nevada, Reno · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
2,100
Allocation
Randomized
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The goal of this prospective trial is to compare CPR skill and attitudes in lay rescuers. The main question[s] it aims to answer are:

  • What is the optimal training timing, duration, and frequency for lay rescuers that leads to CPR skill retention?
  • What is the impact of CPR manikin type (high-fidelity, inflatable, nontraditional objects) on skill retention?
  • How do specific features of training modality -- such as contextualization, gamification, and emotional engagement -- impact skill proficiency, knowledge retention, and attitudes about CPR?

Participants will

  • Answer pre-training questionnaires
  • Participate in CPR training
  • Participate in CPR skills testing
  • Answer post-training questionnaires

Researchers will compare different methods of training, different frequencies of training, and different manikin types.

Read the detailed description

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains a major public health crisis in the United States, with over 350,000 cases annually and low survival rates. Lay rescuer cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can double survival, yet widespread gaps in training access, skill retention, and emotional readiness persist. While most U.S. states mandate high school CPR training, implementation quality varies, and traditional formats have remained unchanged for over 60 years. These methods are often time-consuming, expensive, and poorly suited for adolescents, leading to low participation and rapid skill decay.

This study addresses these critical gaps by comparing various CPR training methods and procedures. The project tests the effectiveness of different training frequencies, durations, and delivery modes-including traditional instructor-led sessions, brief refreshers, and a novel, emotionally immersive serious game. The serious game leverages gamification, competition, and scenario-based learning to build "emotional muscle memory" and prepare students for real-world emergencies.

Participants are enrolled from two high schools-one rural, one suburban-and randomized by class or individual into training arms with varied schedules and compression practice tools. These tools range from high-fidelity manikins to low-fidelity devices and improvised household objects. Outcomes include CPR performance metrics (compression rate, depth, recoil, and hand placement), knowledge retention, emotional engagement (measured via validated psychometric scales), and confidence in responding to cardiac arrest.

Training sessions are delivered during the academic year, and students are assessed immediately after training and again at annual follow-up points. Data are collected in a de-identified format using school-issued ID numbers, ensuring participant confidentiality. Analysis will use generalized estimating equations and mixed-effects models to assess the impact of training method and frequency on skill retention and psychosocial readiness. The study also explores the role of contextualization, emotional engagement, and gamification as mediators of improved CPR performance.

Ultimately, this multi-year trial aims to identify scalable, cost-effective strategies that optimize CPR training outcomes for lay rescuers. By improving technical skill retention and emotional preparedness, the study addresses key priorities for public health impact and aligns with NHLBI's strategic goals to reduce mortality from sudden cardiac arrest.

02

Conditions studied

  • Cardiac Arrest, Out-Of-Hospital

Keywords

  • Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
  • cardiopulmonary resuscitation training
  • Lay Rescuer cardiopulmonary resuscitation
  • lay rescuer cardiopulmonary resuscitation training
03

In context

Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

314 studies on the registry are indexed under Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest; 93 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 2,100 is above the median of 218 across 179 interventional studies indexed under Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

Browse Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Nevada, Reno is the lead sponsor of 28 studies on the registry; 5 are open to participants now.

Of its 5 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 1 (20%) have results posted.

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

  • All students at participating schools

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Previous CPR training (will be included in the CPR training but excluded from analysis)
  • Physical injury which prevents performing CPR
  • Student or parent opt-out
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
2,100 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Every 2 year standard CPR training

    Receives two 60-minute instructor-led CPR trainings: once in 9th grade and again in 11th grade

    Behavioral: CPR Training

  • Active comparator
    Annual Standard CPR training

    Receives a 60-minute instructor-led CPR training each year for three years.

    Behavioral: CPR Training

  • Active comparator
    High-Frequency, Blended Training

    Starts with a 30-minute serious game-based session, followed by 10-minute refreshers every semester for four years (8 total sessions).

    Behavioral: CPR Training

  • Active comparator
    Annual Serious Game Training

    Receives a 30-minute serious game-based training session once per year for three years.

    Behavioral: CPR Training

  • No intervention
    Control

    No CPR training

  • Active comparator
    Standard High-fidelity Manikin

    Uses a commercially available torso manikin with realistic chest mechanics and feedback. Serves as the gold standard comparator for CPR training.

    Device: CPR Manikin Type

  • Active comparator
    Low-Fidelity Manikin

    Uses a basic inflatable torso manikin with minimal feedback or resistance. Represents a low-cost, commonly used alternative in schools and communities.

    Device: CPR Manikin Type

  • Active comparator
    No-Head Manikin (Prototype)

    Uses a custom-built spring-based device with a silicone topper and realistic force-displacement properties that closely mimic the human chest. Tests whether an affordable, biomechanically accurate prototype can improve compression quality.

    Device: CPR Manikin Type

  • Active comparator
    Non-Traditional Object

    Uses improvised materials (e.g., toilet paper rolls) to simulate chest compressions. Evaluates the feasibility and effectiveness of ultra-low-cost CPR practice tools

    Device: CPR Manikin Type

Interventions

  • BehavioralCPR Training

    Various durations and frequencies of CPR training

  • DeviceCPR Manikin Type

    Various types of CPR manikins are compared

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. CPR Skill Retention

    High-quality CPR as measured by compression rate (per minute), depth (inches), and correct hand placement. High-quality CPR is defined as correct rate (100-120/min) AND \>70% of compressions at appropriate depth (2-2.4inches) with appropriate hand placement.

    Time frame: 1-4 years

Secondary outcomes

  1. CPR Attitudes

    Participant confidence and intention to perform CPR, measured using Likert-scale items and validated engagement questionnaires.

    Time frame: 1-4 years

  2. CPR Knowledge Retention

    Percentage of correct answers on a standardized multiple-choice test assessing CPR knowledge and AED use.

    Time frame: 1-4 years

  3. Emotional Profile

    Emotional responses captured by the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), measuring affective realism and readiness.

    Time frame: 1-4 years

  4. Learner Engagement

    Subjective engagement and perceived relevance of CPR training, measured via Likert scales and the Narrative Engagement Scale.

    Time frame: 1-4 years

Other outcomes

  1. Training Feature Effects (Contextualization, Gamification, Emotional Impact)

    Exploratory outcome assessing how specific training design elements influence CPR skills, knowledge, and self-efficacy through mediation and regression analyses.

    Time frame: 1-4 years

07

Study locations

1 site
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — All data is gathered and reported in de-identified, aggregate form, per IRB and school official direction.

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 4, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05908500
Lead sponsor
University of Nevada, Reno
Responsible party
Lorrel Toft (Associate Professor of Medicine, University of Nevada, Reno) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 18, 2023
Start date
Apr 1, 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Mar 31, 2030 (estimated)
Completion
Mar 31, 2031 (estimated)
Last update
Jun 4, 2025

Study contacts

Lorrel Toft, MD
Contact
ltoft@unr.edu
4103028456
Lorrel Toft
principal investigator · University of Nevada, Reno

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in May 2025. 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