Two-Thumb Technique Is Superior to Two-Finger Technique in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation of Simulated Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Infants.

Abstract

BackgroundTo compare the 2‐finger and 2‐thumb chest compression techniques on infant manikins in an out‐of‐hospital setting regarding efficiency of compressions, ventilation, and rescuer pain and fatigue.Methods and ResultsIn a randomized crossover design, 78 medical students performed 2 minutes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation with mouth‐to‐nose ventilation at a 30:2 rate on a Resusci Baby QCPR infant manikin (Laerdal, Stavanger, Norway), using a barrier device and the 2‐finger and 2‐thumb compression techniques. Frequency and depth of chest compressions, proper hand position, complete chest recoil at each compression, hands‐off time, tidal volume, and number of ventilations were evaluated through manikin‐embedded SkillReporting software. After the interventions, standard Likert questionnaires and analog scales for pain and fatigue were applied. The variables were compared by a paired t‐test or Wilcoxon test as suitable. Seventy‐eight students participated in the study and performed 156 complete interventions. The 2‐thumb technique resulted in a greater depth of chest compressions (42 versus 39.7 mm; P<0.01), and a higher percentage of chest compressions with adequate depth (89.5% versus 77%; P<0.01). There were no differences in ventilatory parameters or hands‐off time between techniques. Pain and fatigue scores were higher for the 2‐finger technique (5.2 versus 1.8 and 3.8 versus 2.6, respectively; P<0.01).ConclusionsIn a simulation of out‐of‐hospital, single‐rescuer infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation, the 2‐thumb technique achieves better quality of chest compressions without interfering with ventilation and causes less rescuer pain and fatigue.