Effects and limitations of an AED with audiovisual feedback for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a randomized manikin study

Correctly performed basic life support (BLS) and early defibrillation are the most effective measures to treat sudden cardiac arrest. Audiovisual feedback improves BLS. Automated external defibrillators (AED) with feedback technology may play an important role in improving CPR quality. The aim of this simulation study was to investigate if an AED with audiovisual feedback improves CPR parameters during standard BLS performed by trained laypersons.

Effective compression ratio-A new measurement of the quality of thorax compression during CPR

PURPOSE: Computer-based feedback systems for assessing the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) are widely used these days. Recordings usually involve compression and ventilation dependent variables. Thorax compression depth, sufficient decompression and correct hand position are displayed but interpreted independently of one another. We aimed to generate a parameter, which represents all the combined relevant parameters of compression to provide a rapid assessment of the quality of chest compression-the effective compression ratio (ECR). METHODS: The following parameters were used to determine the ECR: compression depth, correct hand position, correct decompression and the proportion of time used for chest compressions compared to the total time spent on CPR. Based on the ERC guidelines, we calculated that guideline compliant CPR (30:2) has a minimum ECR of 0.79. To calculate the ECR, we expanded the previously described software solution. In order to demonstrate the usefulness of the new ECR-parameter, we first performed a PubMed search for studies that included correct compression and no-flow time, after which we calculated the new parameter, the ECR. RESULTS: The PubMed search revealed 9 trials. Calculated ECR values ranged between 0.03 (for basic life support [BLS] study, two helpers, no feedback) and 0.67 (BLS with feedback from the 6th minute). CONCLUSION: ECR enables rapid, meaningful assessment of CPR and simplifies the comparability of studies as well as the individual performance of trainees. The structure of the software solution allows it to be easily adapted to any manikin, CPR feedback devices and different resuscitation guidelines (e.g. ILCOR, ERC).

Can a website-delivered computer-tailored physical activity intervention be acceptable, usable, and effective for older people?

Despite the numerous health benefits, population physical activity levels are low and declining with age. A continued increase of Internet access allows for website-delivered interventions to be implemented across age-groups, though older people have typically not been considered for this type of intervention. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate a website-delivered computer-tailored physical activity intervention, with a specific focus on differences in tailored advice acceptability, website usability, and physical activity change between three age-groups. To mimic "real-life" conditions, the intervention, which provided personalized physical activity feedback delivered via the Internet, was implemented and evaluated without any personal contact for the entire duration of the study. Data were collected online at baseline, 1-week, and 1-month follow-up and analyzed for three age-groups (≤44, 45-59, and ≥60 years) using linear mixed models. Overall, 803 adults received the intervention and 288 completed all measures. The oldest age-group increased physical activity more than the other two groups, spent the most time on the website, though had significantly lower perceived Internet self-confidence scores when compared with the youngest age-group. No differences were found in terms of website usability and tailored advice acceptability. These results suggest that website-delivered physical activity interventions can be suitable and effective for older aged adults.

FAIR_OSCE – Feedback structure for assessment of interactive roleplay in Objective Structured Clinical Exams

Introduction Since the quality of patient portrayal of standardized patients (SPs) during an Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) has a major impact on the reliability and validity of the exam, quality control should be initiated. Literature about quality control of SPs’ performance focuses on feedback [1, 2] or completion of checklists [3, 4]. Since we did not find a published instrument meeting our needs for the assessment of patient portrayal, we developed such an instrument after being inspired by others [5] and used it in our high-stakes exam. Project description SP trainers from five medical faculties collected and prioritized quality criteria for patient portrayal. Items were revised twice, based on experiences during OSCEs. The final instrument contains 14 criteria for acting (i.e. adequate verbal and non-verbal expression) and standardization (i.e. verbatim delivery of the first sentence). All partners used the instrument during a high-stakes OSCE. SPs and trainers were introduced to the instrument. The tool was used in training (more than 100 observations) and during the exam (more than 250 observations). Outcome High quality of SPs’ patient portrayal during the exam was documented. More than 90% of SP performances were rated to be completely correct or sufficient. An increase in quality of performance between training and exam was noted. For example, the rate of completely correct reaction in medical tests increased from 88% to 95%. Together with 4% of sufficient performances these 95% add up to 99% of the reactions in medical tests meeting the standards of the exam. SP educators using the instrument reported an augmentation of SPs’ performance induced by the use of the instrument. Disadvantages mentioned were the high concentration needed to observe all criteria and the cumbersome handling of the paper-based forms. Discussion We were able to document a very high quality of SP performance in our exam. The data also indicates that our training is effective. We believe that the high concentration needed using the instrument is well invested, considering the observed enhancement of performance. The development of an iPad-based application for the form is planned to address the cumbersome handling of the paper.

Quality assurance of simulated patient feedback in communication training for fourth-year medical students

Introduction In our program, simulated patients (SPs) give feedback to medical students in the course of communication skills training. To ensure effective training, quality control of the SPs’ feedback should be implemented. At other institutions, medical students evaluate the SPs’ feedback for quality control (Bouter et al., 2012). Thinking about implementing quality control for SPs’ feedback in our program, we wondered whether the evaluation by students would result in the same scores as evaluation by experts. Methods Consultations simulated by 4th-year medical students with SPs were video taped including the SP’s feedback to the students (n=85). At the end of the training sessions students rated the SPs’ performance using a rating instrument called Bernese Assessment for Role-play and Feedback (BARF) containing 11 items concerning feedback quality. Additionally the videos were evaluated by 3 trained experts using the BARF. Results The experts showed a high interrater agreement when rating identical feedbacks (ICCunjust=0.953). Comparing the rating of students and experts, high agreement was found with regard to the following items: 1. The SP invited the student to reflect on the consultation first, Amin (= minimal agreement) 97% 2. The SP asked the student what he/she liked about the consultation, Amin = 88%. 3. The SP started with positive feedback, Amin = 91%. 4. The SP was comparing the student with other students, Amin = 92%. In contrast the following items showed differences between the rating of experts and students: 1. The SP used precise situations for feedback, Amax (=maximal agreement) 55%, Students rated 67 of SPs’ feedbacks to be perfect with regard to this item (highest rating on a 5 point Likert scale), while only 29 feedbacks were rated this way by the experts. 2. The SP gave precise suggestions for improvement, Amax 75%, 62 of SPs’ feedbacks obtained the highest rating from students, while only 44 of SPs’ feedbacks achieved the highest rating in the view of the experts. 3. The SP speaks about his/her role in the third person, Amax 60%. Students rated 77 feedbacks with the highest score, while experts judged only 43 feedbacks this way. Conclusion Although evaluation by the students was in agreement with that of experts concerning some items, students rated the SPs’ feedback more often with the optimal score than experts did. Moreover it seems difficult for students to notice when SPs talk about the role in the first instead of the third person. Since precision and talking about the role in the third person are important quality criteria of feedback, this result should be taken into account when thinking about students’ evaluation of SPs’ feedback for quality control. Bouter, S., E. van Weel-Baumgarten, and S. Bolhuis. 2012. Construction and Validation of the Nijmegen Evaluation of the Simulated Patient (NESP): Assessing Simulated Patients’ Ability to Role-Play and Provide Feedback to Students. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges

Functional lateralization of the anterior insula during feedback processing

Effective adaptive behavior rests on an appropriate understanding of how much responsibility we have over outcomes in the environment. This attribution of agency to ourselves or to an external event influences our behavioral and affective response to the outcomes. Despite its special importance to understanding human motivation and affect, the neural mechanisms involved in self-attributed rewards and punishments remain unclear. Previous evidence implicates the anterior insula (AI) in evaluating the consequences of our own actions. However, it is unclear if the AI has a general role in feedback evaluation (positive and negative) or plays a specific role during error processing. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging and a motion prediction task, we investigate neural responses to self- and externally attributed monetary gains and losses. We found that attribution effects vary according to the valence of feedback: significant valence × attribution interactions in the right AI, the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), the midbrain, and the right ventral putamen. Self-attributed losses were associated with increased activity in the midbrain, the ACC and the right AI, and negative BOLD response in the ventral putamen. However, higher BOLD activity to self-attributed feedback (losses and gains) was observed in the left AI, the thalamus, and the cerebellar vermis. These results suggest a functional lateralization of the AI. The right AI, together with the midbrain and the ACC, is mainly involved in processing the salience of the outcome, whereas the left is part of a cerebello-thalamic-cortical pathway involved in cognitive control processes important for subsequent behavioral adaptations.

Comparing three CPR feedback devices and standard BLS in a single rescuer scenario: a randomised simulation study

BACKGROUND Efficiently performed basic life support (BLS) after cardiac arrest is proven to be effective. However, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is strenuous and rescuers' performance declines rapidly over time. Audio-visual feedback devices reporting CPR quality may prevent this decline. We aimed to investigate the effect of various CPR feedback devices on CPR quality. METHODS In this open, prospective, randomised, controlled trial we compared three CPR feedback devices (PocketCPR, CPRmeter, iPhone app PocketCPR) with standard BLS without feedback in a simulated scenario. 240 trained medical students performed single rescuer BLS on a manikin for 8min. Effective compression (compressions with correct depth, pressure point and sufficient decompression) as well as compression rate, flow time fraction and ventilation parameters were compared between the four groups. RESULTS Study participants using the PocketCPR performed 17±19% effective compressions compared to 32±28% with CPRmeter, 25±27% with the iPhone app PocketCPR, and 35±30% applying standard BLS (PocketCPR vs. CPRmeter p=0.007, PocketCPR vs. standard BLS p=0.001, others: ns). PocketCPR and CPRmeter prevented a decline in effective compression over time, but overall performance in the PocketCPR group was considerably inferior to standard BLS. Compression depth and rate were within the range recommended in the guidelines in all groups. CONCLUSION While we found differences between the investigated CPR feedback devices, overall BLS quality was suboptimal in all groups. Surprisingly, effective compression was not improved by any CPR feedback device compared to standard BLS. All feedback devices caused substantial delay in starting CPR, which may worsen outcome.

Improving residency training with the help of multisource feedback: Generation of a model of influencing factors

Background: Feedback is considered to be one of the most important drivers of learning. One form of structured feedback used in medical settings is multisource feedback (MSF). This feedback technique provides the opportunity to gain a differentiated view on a doctor’s performance from several perspectives using a questionnaire and a facilitating conversation, in which learning goals are formulated. While many studies have been conducted on the validity, reliability and feasibility of the instrument, little is known about the impact of factors that might influence the effects of MSF on clinical performance. Summary of Work: To study under which circumstances MSF is most effective, we performed a literature review on Google Scholar with focus on MSF and feedback in general. Main key-words were: MSF, multi-source-feedback, multi source feedback, and feedback each combined with influencing/ hindering/ facilitating factors, effective, effectiveness, doctors-intraining, and surgery. Summary of Results: Based on the literature, we developed a preliminary model of facilitating factors. This model includes five main factors influencing MSF: questionnaire, doctor-in-training, group of raters, facilitating supervisor, and facilitating conversation. Discussion and Conclusions: Especially the following points that might influence MSF have not yet been sufficiently studied: facilitating conversation with the supervisor, individual aspects of doctors-in-training, and the causal relations between influencing factors. Overall there are only very few studies focusing on the impact of MSF on actual and long-term performance. We developed a preliminary model of hindering and facilitating factors on MSF. Further studies are needed to better understand under which circumstances MSF is most effective. Take-home messages: The preliminary model might help to guide further studies on how to implement MSF to use it at its full potential.

Short structured feedback training is equivalent to a mechanical feedback device in two-rescuer BLS: a randomised simulation study.

BACKGROUND Resuscitation guidelines encourage the use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) feedback devices implying better outcomes after sudden cardiac arrest. Whether effective continuous feedback could also be given verbally by a second rescuer ("human feedback") has not been investigated yet. We, therefore, compared the effect of human feedback to a CPR feedback device. METHODS In an open, prospective, randomised, controlled trial, we compared CPR performance of three groups of medical students in a two-rescuer scenario. Group "sCPR" was taught standard BLS without continuous feedback, serving as control. Group "mfCPR" was taught BLS with mechanical audio-visual feedback (HeartStart MRx with Q-CPR-Technology™). Group "hfCPR" was taught standard BLS with human feedback. Afterwards, 326 medical students performed two-rescuer BLS on a manikin for 8 min. CPR quality parameters, such as "effective compression ratio" (ECR: compressions with correct hand position, depth and complete decompression multiplied by flow-time fraction), and other compression, ventilation and time-related parameters were assessed for all groups. RESULTS ECR was comparable between the hfCPR and the mfCPR group (0.33 vs. 0.35, p = 0.435). The hfCPR group needed less time until starting chest compressions (2 vs. 8 s, p < 0.001) and showed fewer incorrect decompressions (26 vs. 33 %, p = 0.044). On the other hand, absolute hands-off time was higher in the hfCPR group (67 vs. 60 s, p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS The quality of CPR with human feedback or by using a mechanical audio-visual feedback device was similar. Further studies should investigate whether extended human feedback training could further increase CPR quality at comparable costs for training.