TY - JOUR
T1 - Hands at work
T2 - A randomised cross-over mannequin-based trial exploring the impact of hand preference of health care professionals on effectiveness of chest compressions
AU - Thaker, Shivam
AU - Nagesh, Savan Kumar
AU - Ravindra, Prithvishree
AU - Kharade, Eesha Vilas
AU - Lingala, Nitish Reddy
AU - Joshi, Shambhavi Vivek
AU - Majgi, Sumanth Mallikarjuna
AU - Adhikari, Shreya Das
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Author(s)
PY - 2025/1
Y1 - 2025/1
N2 - Aim and background: There are various theories regarding the ideal hand to be in contact with chest during chest compressions when healthcare professionals and medical students perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Our study aimed to compare the impact of preferred versus non-preferred hand placement on chest on the CPR quality. Methodology: The volunteers were randomised to place their preferred (P)/non-preferred (NP) hand over sternum for the first session and switch hands for the second. Participants performed 2 min of uninterrupted chest compressions, followed by a 2-minute break and another 2 min of chest compressions on Laerdel QCPR Little Anne® mannequin with auditory feedback. The CPR parameters were analysed using QCPR mobile application. Comfort was assessed using 5-point Likert scale. Results: Among the 82 volunteers, 51 participants (62.2%) preferred their dominant hand to be in contact with the chest. Comparable results were seen with mean QCPR score, rate of compression, mean depth and good recoil percentage. The NP set had higher adequate depth percentage (94.8 +/- 13.7) than the P set (92.3 +/- 19.9) (p = 0.042), but participants were more comfortable using their preferred hand over chest (p = 0.0001). Conclusion: Rescuer performance during chest compressions may not be impacted by whether the preferred hand or non-preferred hand of the provider is in contact with sternum.
AB - Aim and background: There are various theories regarding the ideal hand to be in contact with chest during chest compressions when healthcare professionals and medical students perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Our study aimed to compare the impact of preferred versus non-preferred hand placement on chest on the CPR quality. Methodology: The volunteers were randomised to place their preferred (P)/non-preferred (NP) hand over sternum for the first session and switch hands for the second. Participants performed 2 min of uninterrupted chest compressions, followed by a 2-minute break and another 2 min of chest compressions on Laerdel QCPR Little Anne® mannequin with auditory feedback. The CPR parameters were analysed using QCPR mobile application. Comfort was assessed using 5-point Likert scale. Results: Among the 82 volunteers, 51 participants (62.2%) preferred their dominant hand to be in contact with the chest. Comparable results were seen with mean QCPR score, rate of compression, mean depth and good recoil percentage. The NP set had higher adequate depth percentage (94.8 +/- 13.7) than the P set (92.3 +/- 19.9) (p = 0.042), but participants were more comfortable using their preferred hand over chest (p = 0.0001). Conclusion: Rescuer performance during chest compressions may not be impacted by whether the preferred hand or non-preferred hand of the provider is in contact with sternum.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85213520002&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85213520002&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100849
DO - 10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100849
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85213520002
SN - 2666-5204
VL - 21
JO - Resuscitation Plus
JF - Resuscitation Plus
M1 - 100849
ER -