Objective: Gamification is a non-evaluation and competition-based training methodology with high emotional involvement. The goal of this study was to evaluate gamification methodology as compared with other existing methodologies when teaching cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to secondary school students.Methods: 489 secondary school students from two high schools in Spain participated in this randomised-block quasi-experimental study in February 2018. The students were classified into different groups. Each group received CPR training with a different methodology: GAM (gamification-based training as a compulsory but non-tested academic activity to learn by playing in teams, with instructor and visual feedback); EVA (training based on subsequentevaluationas a motivational incentive, with instructor and visual feedback); VFC (visual feedback complementary, training based on a non-compulsory and non-tested academic activity, with instructor and visual feedback); TC (traditional complementary, training based on a non-compulsory and non-tested academic activity, with instructor feedback). After a week, each student performed a 2 min hands-only CPR test and quality of CPR was assessed. Visual feedback in training and CPR variables in test were provided by the QCPR Instructor App using a Little Anne manikin, both from Laerdal (Norway).Results: GAM (89.56%; 95% CI 86.71 to 92.42) methodology resulted in significantly higher scores for CPR quality than VFC and TC (81.96%; 95% CI 78.04% to 85.88% and 64.11%; 95% CI 58.23 to 69.99). GAM (61.77%; 95% CI 56.09 to 67.45) methodology also resulted in significantly higher scores for correct rate than VFC and TC (48.41%; 95% CI 41.15% to 55.67% and 17.28%; 95% CI 10.94 to 23.62). 93.4% of GAM methodology participants obtained >50 mm of compression mean depth which was a significantly higher proportion than among students in VFC and TC (78.0% and 71.9%). No differences between GAM and EVA were found. A confidence level of 95% has been assigned to all values.Conclusions: GAM methodology resulted in higher CPR quality than non-tested methods of academic training with instructor feedback or visual feedback. Gamification should be considered as an alternative teaching method for Basic Life Support (BLS) in younger individuals.

The aim of the study was to explore feasibility of basic life support (BLS) guided through smart glasses (SGs) when assisting fishermen bystanders. Twelve participants assisted a simulated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest on a fishing boat assisted by the dispatcher through the SGs. The SGs were connected to make video calls. Feasibility was assessed whether or not they needed help from the dispatcher. BLS-AED steps, time to first shock/compression, and CPR’s quality (hands-only) during 2 consecutive minutes (1st minute without dispatcher feedback, 2nd with dispatcher feedback) were analyzed. Reliability was analyzed by comparing the assessment of variables performed by the dispatcher through SGs with those registered by an on-scene instructor. Assistance through SGs was needed in 72% of the BLS steps, which enabled all participants to perform the ABC approach and use AED correctly. Feasibility was proven that dispatcher’s feedback through SGs helped to improve bystanders’ performance, as after dispatcher gave feedback via SGs, only 3% of skills were incorrect. Comparison of on-scene instructor vs. SGs assessment by dispatcher differ in 8% of the analyzed skills: greatest difference in the "incorrect hand position during CPR" (on-scene: 33% vs. dispatcher: 0%). When comparing the 1st minute with 2nd minute, there were only significant differences in the percentage of compressions with correct depth (1st:48 ± 42%, 2nd:70 ± 31, p = 0.02). Using SGs in aquatic settings is feasible and improves BLS. CPR quality markers were similar with and without SG. These devices have great potential for communication between dispatchers and laypersons but need more development to be used in real emergencies.

Decision-making in emergencies is a multifactorial process based on the rescuer, patient, setting and resources. The eye-tracking system is a proven method for assessing decision-making processes that have been used in different fields of science. Our aim was to evaluate the lifeguards’ capacity to perform the ABCDE (Airway-Breathing-Circulation-Disability-Exposure) approach when facing a simulated critically ill-drowned victim. A cross-sectional simulation study was designed to assess the skills and sequence of the ABCDE approach by 20 professional lifeguards. They had to assess a victim and act according to his/her clinical status by following the ABCDE primary assessment approach. The two kinds of variables were recorder: those related to the quality of each step of the ABCDE approach and the visual behaviour using a portable eye-movement system. The eye-tracking system was the Mobile Eye system (Bedford, USA). None of the study participants were able to complete correctly the ABCDE approach. Lifeguards spent more time in the Circulation step: Airway (15.5±11.1 s), Breathing (25.1±21.1 s), Circulation (44.6±29.5 s), Disability (38.5±0.7 s). Participants spent more time in viewpoints considered as important (65.5±17.4 s) compared with secondary ones (34.6±17.4 s, p = 0.008). This was also represented in the percentage of visual fixations (fixations in important viewpoints: 63.36±15.06; fixation in secondary viewpoints: 36.64±15.06; p = 0.008). Professional lifeguards failed to fully perform the ABCDE sequence. Evaluation by experts with the help of eye-tracking technology detected the lifeguards’ limitations in the assessment and treatment of an eventual critically ill victim. Such deficits should be considered in the design and implementation of lifeguards’ training programmes.

The aim of the study was to compare the quality of CPR (Q-CPR), as well as the perceived fatigue and hand pain in a prolonged infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed by lifeguards using three different techniques. A randomized crossover simulation study was used to compare three infant CPR techniques: the two-finger technique (TF); the two-thumb encircling technique (TTE) and the two-thumb-fist technique (TTF). 58 professional lifeguards performed three tests in pairs during a 20-min period of CPR. The rescuers performed compressions and ventilations in 15:2 cycles and changed their roles every 2 min. The variables of analysis were CPR quality components, rate of perceived exertion (RPE) and hand pain with numeric rating scale (NRS). All three techniques showed high Q-CPR results (TF: 86 ± 9%/TTE: 88 ± 9%/TTF: 86 ± 16%), and the TTE showed higher values than the TF (p = 0.03). In the RPE analysis, fatigue was not excessive with any of the three techniques (values 20 min between 3.2 for TF, 2.4 in TTE and 2.5 in TTF on a 10-point scale). TF reached a higher value in RPE than TTF in all the intervals analyzed (p < 0.05). In relation to NRS, TF showed significantly higher values than TTE and TTF (NRS minute 20 = TF 4.7 vs. TTE 2.5 & TTF 2.2; p < 0.001). In conclusion, all techniques have been shown to be effective in high-quality infant CPR in a prolonged resuscitation carried out by lifeguards. However, the two-finger technique is less efficient in relation to fatigue and hand pain compared with two-thumb technique (TF vs. TTF, p = 0.01).