4.5 Article

Standardising communication to improve in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Journal

RESUSCITATION
Volume 147, Issue -, Pages 73-80

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2019.12.013

Keywords

In-hospital cardiac arrest; Advanced life support; Nontechnical skills; Communication; Delphi technique; Simulation

Funding

  1. Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Aarhus University
  2. AP Moller Foundation
  3. Korningfonden
  4. EliteForsk by Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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 15-30s 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 3.8s. [3.6; 5.0] vs. 6.9s. [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.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available