Lim D, et al. J Korean Med Sci. 2021 Sep;36(36):e255. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e255

Ryu JH, et al. J Korean Med Sci. 2019 Mar;34(14):e114. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2019.34.e114

We compared training using a voice advisory manikin (VAM) with an instructor-led (IL) course in terms of acquisition of initial cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) skills, as defined by the 2010 resuscitation guidelines. This study was a randomized, controlled, blinded, parallel-group trial. We recruited 82 first-year emergency medical technician students and distributed them randomly into two groups: the IL group (n=41) and the VAM group (n=37). In the IL-group, participants were trained in "single-rescuer, adult CPR" according to the American Heart Association's Basic Life Support course for healthcare providers. In the VAM group, all subjects received a 20-minute lesson about CPR. After the lesson, each student trained individually with the VAM for 1 hour, receiving real-time feedback. After the training, all subjects were evaluated as they performed basic CPR (30 compressions, 2 ventilations) for 4 minutes. The proportion of participants with a mean compression depth ≥50 mm was 34.1% in the IL group and 27.0% in the VAM group, and the proportion with a mean compression depth ≥40 mm had increased significantly in both groups compared with ≥50 mm (IL group, 82.9%; VAM group, 86.5%). However, no significant differences were detected between the groups in this regard. The proportion of ventilations of the appropriate volume was relatively low in both groups (IL group, 26.4%; VAM group, 12.5%; P=0.396). Both methods, the IL training using a practice-while-watching video and the VAM training, facilitated initial CPR skill acquisition, especially in terms of correct chest compression.

This study was to identify the effect of epinephrine on the survival of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients and changes in prehospital emergency medical services (EMSs) after the introduction of prehospital epinephrine use by EMS providers. This was a retrospective observational study comparing two groups (epinephrine group and norepinephrine group). We used propensity score matching of the two groups and identified the association between outcome variables regarding survival and epinephrine use, controlling for confounding factors. The epinephrine group was 339 patients of a total 1943 study population. The survival-to-discharge rate and OR (95% CI) of the epinephrine group were 5.0% (p = 0.215) and 0.72 (0.43–1.21) in the total patient population and 4.7% (p = 0.699) and 1.15 (0.55–2.43) in the 1:1 propensity-matched population. The epinephrine group received more mechanical chest compression and had longer EMS response times and scene times than the norepinephrine group. Mechanical chest compression was a negative prognostic factor for survival to discharge and favorable neurological outcomes in the epinephrine group. The introduction of prehospital epinephrine use in OHCA patients yielded no evidence of improvement in survival to discharge and favorable neurological outcomes and adversely affected the practice of EMS providers, exacerbating the factors negatively associated with survival from OHCA.

It is important to predict the neurological prognoses of in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) patients immediately after recovery of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) to make further critical management. The aim of this study was to confirm the usefulness of the Cardiac Arrest Survival Post-Resuscitation In-hospital (CASPRI) and Good Outcome Following Attempted Resuscitation (GO-FAR) scores for predicting the IHCA immediately after the ROSC. This is a retrospective analysis of patient data from a tertiary general hospital located in South Korea. A total of 488 adult patients who had IHCA and achieved sustained ROSC from September 2016 to August 2021 were analyzed to compare effectiveness of the CASPRI and GO-FAR scores related to neurologic prognosis. The primary outcome was Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) score at discharge, defined as a CPC score of 1 or 2. The secondary outcomes were survival-to-discharge and normal neurological status or minimal neurological damage at discharge. Of the 488 included patients, 85 (20.8%) were discharged with good prognoses (CPC score of 1 or 2). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of CASPRI score for the prediction of a good neurological outcome was 0.75 (95% CI 0.69–0.81), whereas that of GO-FAR score was 0.67 (95% CI 0.60–0.73). The results of this study show that these scoring systems can be used for timely and satisfactory prediction of the neurological prognoses of IHCA patients after ROSC.

Purpose: Setting standards is critical in health professions. However, appropriate standard setting methods do not always apply to the set cut score in performance assessment. The aim of this study was to compare the cut score when the standard setting is changed from the norm-referenced method to the borderline group method (BGM) and borderline regression method (BRM) in an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) in medical school.Methods: This was an explorative study to model the implementation of the BGM and BRM. A total of 107 fourth-year medical students attended the OSCE at 7 stations for encountering standardized patients (SPs) and at 1 station for performing skills on a manikin on July 15th, 2021. Thirty-two physician examiners evaluated the performance by completing a checklist and global rating scales.Results: The cut score of the norm-referenced method was lower than that of the BGM (P<0.01) and BRM (P<0.02). There was no significant difference in the cut score between the BGM and BRM (P=0.40). The station with the highest standard deviation and the highest proportion of the borderline group showed the largest cut score difference in standard setting methods.Conclusion: Prefixed cut scores by the norm-referenced method without considering station contents or examinee performance can vary due to station difficulty and content, affecting the appropriateness of standard setting decisions. If there is an adequate consensus on the criteria for the borderline group, standard setting with the BRM could be applied as a practical and defensible method to determine the cut score for OSCE.