Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 31, 2025

Standardized Model of Ventricular Fibrillation and Advanced Cardiac Life Support in Swine
Published on: January 30, 2020
Standardising communication to improve in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation
Kasper Glerup Lauridsen1, Ichiro Watanabe2, Bo Løfgren3
1Research Center for Emergency Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Internal Medicine, Randers Regional Hospital, Denmark; Center for Simulation, Advanced Education and Innovation, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, USA; Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, USA.
Aim:
Recommendations for standardised communication to reduce chest compression (CC) pauses are lacking. We aimed to achieve consensus and evaluate feasibility and efficacy using standardised communication during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) events.
Methods:
Modified Delphi consensus process to design standardised communication elements. Feasibility was pilot tested in 16 simulated CPR scenarios (8 scenarios with physician team leaders and 8 with chest compressors) randomized (1:1) to standardised [INTERVENTION] vs. closed-loop communication [CONTROL]. Adherence and efficacy (duration of CC pauses for defibrillation, intubation, rhythm check) was assessed by audiovisual recording. Mental demand and frustration were assessed by NASA task load index subscales.
Results:
Consensus elements for standardised communication included: 1) team preparation 15-30 s before CC interruption, 2) pre-interruption countdown synchronized with last 5 CCs, 3) specific action words for defibrillation, intubation, and interrupting/resuming CCs. Median (Q1,Q3) adherence to standardised phrases was 98% (80%,100%). Efficacy analysis showed a median [Q1,Q3] peri-shock pause of 5.1 s. [4.4; 5.8] vs. 7.5 s. [6.3; 8.8] seconds, p < 0.001, intubation pause of 3.8 s. [3.6; 5.0] vs. 6.9 s. [4.8; 10.1] seconds, p = 0.03, rhythm check pause of 4.2 [3.2,5.7] vs. 8.6 [5.0,10.5] seconds, p < 0.001, median frustration index of 10/100 [5,20] vs. 35/100 [25,50], p < 0.001, and median mental demand load of 55/100 [30,70] vs. 65/100 [50,85], p = 0.41 for standardised vs. closed loop communication.
Conclusion:
This pilot study demonstrated feasibility of using consensus-based standardised communication that was associated with shorter CC pauses for defibrillation, intubation, and rhythm checks without increasing frustration index or mental demand compared to current best practice, closed loop communication.
Related Concept Videos
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation I: Adult
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation IV: Pharmacological Management
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation II: ACLS Airway Management
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation III: AED Use
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation V: Advanced Airway Management Techniques
SBAR I: Understanding the Concept
Standardized methods of communication have been developed to ensure that information is...

