Abstract
Since a great number of infant cardiopulmonary arrests occur outside of the hospital, it is crucial to train laypersons in cardiopulmonary resuscitation techniques, especially those professionals that will work with infants and children. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the efectiveness of ventilations performed by professional training students. The secondary objective was to analyze the preference between different ventilation and chest-compression methods. The sample consisted of 32 professional training students, 15 preschool students, and 17 physical education students. The activity was conducted separately for each group, and we provided a 10 min theoretical training about infant basic life support followed by a 45 min practical training using a Laerdal Little Anne QCPR CPR manikin. A practical test in pairs was organized to record the ventilation as performed by the participants, establishing the difference between the efficacious and the non-efficacious ones. Furthermore, we handed out a survey before and after training to evaluate their knowledge. More than 90% of the students completely agreed with the importance of learning cardiopulmonary resuscitation techniques for their professional future. More than half of the sample considered that they perform the rescue breathings with the mouth-to-mouth method better. We observed that through mouth-to-mouth-nose ventilations, the number of effective ventilations was significantly higher than the effective ventilations provided by a self-inflating bag and mask (EffectiveMtoMN 6.42 ± 4.27 vs. EffectiveMask 4.75 ± 3.63 (p = 0.007)), which was the preferred method. In terms of the compression method, hands encircling the chest was preferred by more than 85% of students. Mouth-to-mouth nose ventilation is more efficient than bag-face-mask ventilation in CPR as performed by professional training and physical activity students. This fact must be considered to provide higher-quality training sessions to professional training students.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.