Effect of a Sound Recognition-Based Basic Life Support Training Program on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Performance: A Randomized Simulation Study

IF 1.3 4区医学 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE

Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2025-08-18 DOI:10.1016/j.jemermed.2025.08.022

Dong Hyun Choi MD PHD , Jeong Ho Park MD PHD , Yoon Ha Joo PHD , Ki Hong Kim MD PHD , Hyunjin Joo MSC , Hyoun-Joong Kong PHD , Kyoung Jun Song MD PHD , Sang Do Shin MD PHD

{"title":"Effect of a Sound Recognition-Based Basic Life Support Training Program on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Performance: A Randomized Simulation Study","authors":"Dong Hyun Choi MD PHD , Jeong Ho Park MD PHD , Yoon Ha Joo PHD , Ki Hong Kim MD PHD , Hyunjin Joo MSC , Hyoun-Joong Kong PHD , Kyoung Jun Song MD PHD , Sang Do Shin MD PHD","doi":"10.1016/j.jemermed.2025.08.022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Decentralized self-instruction basic life support (BLS) training is gaining interest.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>We evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of Beep-cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), a cost-effective, at-home, self-instruction BLS training program, on CPR performance.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This randomized noninferiority simulation trial compared CPR performance between Beep-CPR and conventional BLS training in healthy adults. Beep-CPR training comprised a 30-min self-instruction session using a smartphone and low-cost CPR manikin with real-time sound-based feedback. Conventional training involved a 30-min instructor-led group session. CPR performance was assessed by a blinded assessor using a standardized scenario. Primary outcome was mean compression depth. Secondary outcomes included mean compression rate, mean chest compression release velocity (CCRV), and overall BLS performance score.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>One hundred participants (mean age [standard deviation (SD)]: 41.8 years [14.0], 36% male) were randomized. Beep-CPR training was noninferior to conventional BLS training in compression depth (mean [SD]: 6.1 [0.8] cm vs. 6.0 [0.8] cm; mean difference [95% confidence interval], 0.1 [0.0–0.1] cm; noninferiority <em>p</em> < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the mean (SD) compression rate (111 [14]/min vs. 111 [13]/min), mean CCRV (451 [76] mm/s vs. 444 [76] mm/s), or overall BLS performance score (7.4 [1.1] vs. 7.7 [0.6]). The mean System Usability Score for Beep-CPR was 80.4 (SD: 12.9), indicating “good” usability and user satisfaction.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Beep-CPR training is feasible for use in real-world CPR training environments and is not inferior to conventional BLS training in terms of CPR performance. This program offers a promising approach to expanding decentralized, at-home BLS education.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16085,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":"78 ","pages":"Pages 248-257"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0736467925003300","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Decentralized self-instruction basic life support (BLS) training is gaining interest.

Objectives

We evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of Beep-cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), a cost-effective, at-home, self-instruction BLS training program, on CPR performance.

Methods

This randomized noninferiority simulation trial compared CPR performance between Beep-CPR and conventional BLS training in healthy adults. Beep-CPR training comprised a 30-min self-instruction session using a smartphone and low-cost CPR manikin with real-time sound-based feedback. Conventional training involved a 30-min instructor-led group session. CPR performance was assessed by a blinded assessor using a standardized scenario. Primary outcome was mean compression depth. Secondary outcomes included mean compression rate, mean chest compression release velocity (CCRV), and overall BLS performance score.

Results

One hundred participants (mean age [standard deviation (SD)]: 41.8 years [14.0], 36% male) were randomized. Beep-CPR training was noninferior to conventional BLS training in compression depth (mean [SD]: 6.1 [0.8] cm vs. 6.0 [0.8] cm; mean difference [95% confidence interval], 0.1 [0.0–0.1] cm; noninferiority p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the mean (SD) compression rate (111 [14]/min vs. 111 [13]/min), mean CCRV (451 [76] mm/s vs. 444 [76] mm/s), or overall BLS performance score (7.4 [1.1] vs. 7.7 [0.6]). The mean System Usability Score for Beep-CPR was 80.4 (SD: 12.9), indicating “good” usability and user satisfaction.

Conclusion

Beep-CPR training is feasible for use in real-world CPR training environments and is not inferior to conventional BLS training in terms of CPR performance. This program offers a promising approach to expanding decentralized, at-home BLS education.

查看原文本刊更多论文

基于声音识别的基本生命支持训练计划对心肺复苏表现的影响：一项随机模拟研究

分散的自我指导基本生命支持（BLS）培训正在引起人们的兴趣。目的评估哔哔式心肺复苏（CPR）的可行性和有效性，这是一种成本效益高、在家、自我指导的BLS培训计划。方法本随机非效性模拟试验比较了健康成人哔哔式CPR和常规BLS训练的CPR表现。哔哔式心肺复苏术训练包括30分钟的自学课程，使用智能手机和低成本的心肺复苏术假人，并提供实时声音反馈。传统的培训包括一个30分钟的由老师指导的小组会议。CPR的表现由采用标准化方案的盲法评估者评估。主要终点为平均压缩深度。次要结局包括平均压缩率、平均胸压释放速度（CCRV）和总体BLS表现评分。结果随机分组100例，平均年龄[标准差（SD）]: 41.8岁[14.0]，男性36%。在按压深度方面，Beep-CPR训练不逊于常规BLS训练（平均[SD]: 6.1 [0.8] cm vs. 6.0 [0.8] cm；平均差异[95%置信区间]，0.1 [0.0-0.1]cm；非效性p <； 0.001）。在平均（SD）压缩率（111 [14]/min vs. 111 [14]/min）、平均CCRV （451 [76] mm/s vs. 444 [76] mm/s）或总体BLS性能评分（7.4 [1.1]vs. 7.7[0.6]）方面没有显著差异。Beep-CPR的平均系统可用性评分为80.4 (SD: 12.9)，表示“良好”的可用性和用户满意度。结论beep -CPR训练在现实心肺复苏训练环境中是可行的，在心肺复苏效果上不低于传统的BLS训练。这个项目提供了一个很有前途的方法来扩大分散的、在家的劳工统计局教育。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Emergency Medicine 医学-急救医学

CiteScore

2.40

自引率

6.70%

发文量

339

审稿时长

2-4 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Emergency Medicine is an international, peer-reviewed publication featuring original contributions of interest to both the academic and practicing emergency physician. JEM, published monthly, contains research papers and clinical studies as well as articles focusing on the training of emergency physicians and on the practice of emergency medicine. The Journal features the following sections: • Original Contributions • Clinical Communications: Pediatric, Adult, OB/GYN • Selected Topics: Toxicology, Prehospital Care, The Difficult Airway, Aeromedical Emergencies, Disaster Medicine, Cardiology Commentary, Emergency Radiology, Critical Care, Sports Medicine, Wound Care • Techniques and Procedures • Technical Tips • Clinical Laboratory in Emergency Medicine • Pharmacology in Emergency Medicine • Case Presentations of the Harvard Emergency Medicine Residency • Visual Diagnosis in Emergency Medicine • Medical Classics • Emergency Forum • Editorial(s) • Letters to the Editor • Education • Administration of Emergency Medicine • International Emergency Medicine • Computers in Emergency Medicine • Violence: Recognition, Management, and Prevention • Ethics • Humanities and Medicine • American Academy of Emergency Medicine • AAEM Medical Student Forum • Book and Other Media Reviews • Calendar of Events • Abstracts • Trauma Reports • Ultrasound in Emergency Medicine