Straddle versus Conventional Chest Compressions in a Confined Space; a Comparative Study

Abstract

Introduction:When cardiac arrest occurs in a confined space, such as in an aircraft or ambulance, kneeling by the patient’s side may be difficult. Straddle chest compression is an alternative technique that can be used in a confined space. This study was performed to compare the quality of chest compressions in straddle versus conventional CPR on a manikin model.Methods:The participants were randomized into two groups using the sequential numbered, opaque, sealed envelope method chosen through block-of-four randomization: straddle and conventional chest compression technique. Each participant performed a maximum of 4 minutes of hands-only chest compressions, and quality parameters (compression rate and depth) were recorded from the defibrillator's monitor.Results:124 participants with mean age of 26.67 ± 6.90 years (27.58% male) were studied. There was no difference in the mean compression rate between the conventional and straddle chest compression techniques (126.18 ± 17.11 and 127.01 ± 21.01 compressions/min, respectively; p = 0.811) or their mean compression depth (43.8 ± 9.60 and 43.4 ± 9.10 mm, respectively; p = 0.830). The participants’ comfort and fatigue were assessed through changes in their vital signs. In both methods, statistically significant differences were observed in vital signs before and after performing chest compression, but the differences were not clinically significant. In addition, there was no difference between the 2 groups in this regard.Conclusion:The quality of CPR using the straddle chest compression was as good as conventional chest compression technique. No significant differences were found in the quality of chest compressions or the participants’ comfort and fatigue levels.