Evaluating video-supported layperson CPR compared to a standard training course: A randomized controlled trial

Area of Science:

• Emergency Medicine
• Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) Training
• Public Health Interventions

Background:

• Limited evidence compares layperson CPR performance between just-in-time (JIT) video training and traditional in-person courses.
• JIT training is often associated with potential time and cost savings.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare layperson CPR performance after JIT video training versus an in-person course or no training.
• To evaluate the effectiveness of different CPR training modalities on critical CPR actions.

Main Methods:

• Adult employees were randomized into three groups: AHA HeartSaver® course, JIT video training, or no training (control).
• CPR performance was assessed using trained evaluators and QCPR-enabled simulators in a simulated scenario.
• The primary outcome was the performance of pre-defined critical CPR actions.

Main Results:

• Correct CPR performance was highest in the AHA group (40%), followed by JIT (15%) and control (10%).
• Compression fraction was significantly higher in the AHA group (90%) compared to JIT (61%) and control (65%).
• An automated external defibrillator (AED) was requested more frequently in the AHA group (47%) than JIT (15%) or control (10%).

Conclusions:

• Traditional CPR courses resulted in better overall performance of correct CPR skills.
• Laypersons using JIT video training demonstrated comparable performance to traditional courses on specific measures like time to chest compressions and compression rate.