DIspatcher REsusCitation Terminology study (The DIRECT study)
Research type
Research Study
Full title
In adults delivering CPR, does the use of a specific terminology to instruct cardiopulmonary resuscitation delivery CPR instructions affect CPR quality? A randomised controlled manikin trial.
IRAS ID
225294
Contact name
Liz Adey
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 6 months, 31 days
Research summary
Each year, approximately 30,000 people in the UK suffer an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. A cardiac arrest occurs when the heart suddenly stops beating properly. Immediate treatment is essential to prevent death. Patients have the best chance of survival when they receive cardiopulmonary resuscitation before the ambulance arrives. In people that have not been trained to do this, the ambulance service can coach people to do this over the phone.
At the moment, we do not know the best way to instruct people over the phone to ensure they deliver high-quality CPR. Across international CPR guidelines, there is variation in the wording used to describe how best to perform CPR.
We plan a randomised controlled manikin trial to identify the best way to instruct people how to deliver CPR. Adults without recent CPR training will be invited to take part. They will perform CPR on a manikin, based on instructions similar to those given when the ambulance service instruct people over the phone. There will be three groups, which will each receive a slightly different instruction regarding how hard to press on the chest (‘at least 5cm,’ ‘approximately 5cm,’ ‘hard and fast’). Allocation of individuals to groups will be decided by chance. They will be asked to deliver CPR to a manikin based on these instructions for two minutes. There will be no follow-up. We will measure the quality of CPR delivered to the manikin. We plan to recruit 330 participants.Findings from this study will inform the terminology used in international resuscitation guidelines.
The study is funded by Resuscitation Council (UK).
REC name
West Midlands - Edgbaston Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
17/WM/0234
Date of REC Opinion
28 Jun 2017
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion