• The Korean Journal of Emergency Medical Services
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.99-107
• /
• 2019

Purpose: This study aimed to identify the position for the most accurate head-up cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by comparing saddle position CPR (SPCPR) and traditional CPR (TCPR). Methods: Sixty certified persons who completed a basic life support provider course between May 1 and June 21, 2019 were enrolled in the study. The participants were asked to perform 2 minutes of CPR, and the depth of chest compression, rate, position, full release, and hands off time were assessed. Accuracy was evaluated based on data collected from a smart phone application connected to the manikin via bluetooth and analyzed using frequency, percentage, t-test, analysis of variance and ${\chi}^2$. Results: The accuracy of chest compression was statistically significantly higher for SPCPR, 63.03%[${\pm}8.75$] for SPCPR and 55.50%[${\pm}10.17$] for TCPR [t=3.074, p=.003]. The depth of chest compression was statistically significantly greater for SPCPR, 4.51cm[${\pm}0.45$] for SPCPR and 4.16cm[${\pm}0.61$] for TCPR [t=2.503, p=.015]. The rate of chest compression was statistically significantly higher for TCPR, 105/min[${\pm}10.79$] for SPCPR and 111/min[${\pm}11.57$] for TCPR [t=-2.008, p=.049]. Accuracy of position of chest compression was statistically significantly higher for SPCPR, 96.10%[${\pm}13.73$] for SPCPR and 79.93%[${\pm}30.34$] for TCPR [t=2.659, p=.011]. Accuracy of full release was higher with SPCPR, with 86.30%[${\pm}30.53$] for SPCPR and 71.10%[${\pm}36.05$] for TCPR, but the difference was not statistically significant [t=1.762, p=.083]. Conclusion: Saddle position CPR was found to be more accurate than TCPR in the performance of manual head-up CPR.