Impact of a CPR feedback device on healthcare provider workload during simulated cardiac arrest

We aimed to describe the differences in workload between team leaders and CPR providers during a simulated pediatric cardiac arrest, to evaluate the impact of a CPR feedback device on provider workload, and to describe the association between provider workload and the quality of CPR.

We conducted secondary analysis of data from a randomized trial comparing CPR quality in teams with and without use of a real-time visual CPR feedback device [1]. Healthcare providers (team leaders and CPR providers) completed the NASA Task Load Index survey after participating in a simulated cardiac arrest scenario. The effect of provider roles and real-time feedback on workload were compared with independent t-tests.

Team leaders reported higher levels of mental demand, temporal demand, performance-related workload and frustration, while CPR providers reported comparatively higher physical workload. CPR providers reported significantly higher average workload (control 58.5 vs. feedback 62.3; p = 0.035) with real-time feedback provided compared to the group without feedback. Providers with high workloads (average score >60) had an increased percentage of time with guideline-compliant CPR depth versus those with low workloads (average score <60) (p = 0.034).

Healthcare providers reported high workloads during a simulated pediatric cardiac arrest. Physical and mental workloads differed based on provider role. CPR providers using a CPR feedback device reported increased average workloads. The quality of CPR improved with higher reported physical workloads.