↓ Skip to main content

The CPR outcomes of online medical video instruction versus on-scene medical instruction using simulated cardiac arrest stations

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Emergency Medicine, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The CPR outcomes of online medical video instruction versus on-scene medical instruction using simulated cardiac arrest stations
Published in
BMC Emergency Medicine, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12873-016-0092-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chaiyaporn Yuksen, Sorravit Sawatmongkornkul, Jarupol Tuangsirisup, Kittisak Sawanyawisuth, Yuwares Sittichanbuncha

Abstract

Non-traumatic cardiac arrest is a fatal emergency condition. Its survival rate and outcomes may be better with quick and effective cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Telemedicine such as telephone or real time video has been shown to improve chest compression procedures. There are limited data on the effects of telemedicine in cardiac arrest situations in the literature particularly in Asian settings. This study was conducted by using two simulated cardiac arrest stations during the 2014 annual Thai national conference in emergency medicine. These two stations, nos. 5 and 11, were a part of the conference activity called "EMS rally" which was comprised of 14 stations. Both stations were shockable and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest situations; station 5 was online instructed, while station 11 was on-scene instructed. There were 14 representative teams from each province from all over Thailand who participated in the rally. Each team had one physician, one nurse, and two emergency medicine technicians. Eight CPR outcomes were evaluated and compared between the online versus on-scene situations. There were 14 representative teams that participated in the study; a total of 14 physicians, 14 nurses, and 28 emergency medicine technicians. The average ages of participants in all three occupations were between the second and third decade of life. The percentages of participants with more than 3 years in ambulance experience was 7.1, 64.3, and 53.6 % in the physicians, nurses, and EMTs groups. The median times of all outcomes were significantly longer in the online group than the on-scene group including times from start to chest compression (total 102 vs 36 s), total times from the start to VT/VF detection (187 vs 99 s); times from VT/VF detection to the first defibrillation (57 vs 28 s); and times from the start of adrenaline injection (282 vs 165 s). The percentages of using amiodarone (21.43 % vs 57.14 %; p value < 0.001), establishment of a definitive airway (35.71 % vs 100 %; p value 0.003), and correct detections of pulseless electrical activity (PEA) (28.57 % vs 100 %; p value < 0.001) were significantly lower in the online group than the on-scene group. The high quality CPR outcomes between the online group and on-scene group were comparable. The online medical instruction may have worse CPR outcomes compared with on-scene medical instruction in shockable, simulated CPR scenarios. Further studies are needed to confirm these results.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 131 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 11%
Researcher 12 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Student > Master 10 8%
Other 8 6%
Other 30 23%
Unknown 47 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 19%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 51 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 August 2017.
All research outputs
#12,901,626
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from BMC Emergency Medicine
#355
of 757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,600
of 354,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Emergency Medicine
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 354,435 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.