ArticleScientific reports2023
Chest compression quality and patient outcomes with the use of a CPR feedback device: A retrospective study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing lifesaving skills in children: a simulation-based randomized controlled trial in schools.Resuscitation plus · 2025Article
- Effects of prehospital advanced airway management on cardiac arrest patients who underwent extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Role of Different Feedback Devices in the Survival of Patients in Cardiac Arrest: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Real-time feedback for CPR quality - A scoping review.Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
- Detection and Evaluation for High-Quality Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Based on a Three-Dimensional Motion Capture System: A Feasibility Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Feedback devices were developed to guide resuscitations as targets recommended by various guidelines are difficult to achieve. Yet, there is limited evidence to support their use for in-hospital cardiac arrests (IHCA), and they did not correlate with patient outcomes. Therefore, this study has investigated the compression quality and patient outcomes in IHCA with the use of a feedback device via a retrospective study of inpatient code blue activations in a Singapore hospital over one year. The primary outcome was compression quality and secondary outcomes were survival, downtime and neurological status. 64 of 110 (58.2%) cases were included. Most resuscitations (71.9%) met the recommended chest compression fraction (CCF, defined as the proportion of time spent on compressions during resuscitation) despite overall quality being suboptimal. Greater survival to discharge and better neurological status in resuscitated patients respectively correlated with higher median CCF (p = 0.040 and 0.026 respectively) and shorter downtime (p < 0.001 and 0.001 respectively); independently, a higher CCF correlated with a shorter downtime (p = 0.014). Overall, this study demonstrated that reducing interruptions is crucial for good outcomes in IHCA. However, compression quality remained suboptimal despite feedback device implementation, possibly requiring further simulation training and coaching. Future multicentre studies incorporating these measures should be explored.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.