Abstract Su405: Effect Of A Visual Feedback Device On The Acquisition Of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Skills In Training Certified By The American Heart Association: Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: High-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is fundamental for the success in the care of cardiorespiratory arrest. In CPR skills training, manequins with feedback on quality parameters have been employed and received varied evaluative results. The American Heart Association (AHA) encourages the use of feedback devices in CPR training; however, its effects have not been evaluated in courses certified by it. Research Questions: Training with visual feedback devices alters the learning of students in acquiring psychomotor skills in CPR? Goals: To evaluate the effect of a visual feedback device on CPR training, in AHA certified courses. Methods: A randomized clinical trial was conducted to estimate the intervention of a visual feedback device in practical CPR training for nurses, medical students and physicians in the Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support (ACLS) courses. For that, having as parameters the quality criteria determined by the AHA, we tried to compare the performance results of the trained students with objective feedback from the device and the trained students with subjective feedback from the instructor. Statistical analysis included chi-square test, Student's t test, Mann-Whitney u test, Spearman’s-rho correlation coefficient. Significance level considered was 0.05. A survey was registered with ClinicalTrials®, under resgistration NCT 04338490. Results: The sample consisted of 209 students; of these 119 (56.9%) were women, and 148 (70.8%) were physicians. The control group had 98 students, and the intervention group 111 students. The performance of students from both groups reached the criteria of quality in CPR. The group trained with a feedback device achieved, according to guidelines, better results in the rate of chest compressions, 78 (70.3%) versus 48 (49.0%), p <0.01, and in return of the chest 100 (91; 100) versus 99 (78.25; 100), p <0.03. As for the recommended compression fraction, 60% to 80%, both groups were above 60%; however, no student in the study reached 80%. Conclusions: The visual feedback device was effective in CPR training, improving students’ performance in the criteria of compression rates between 100 and 120/min and total return of the chest between compressions.