The two-thumb is superior to the two-finger method for administering chest compressions in a manikin model of neonatal resuscitation

Catherine Christman, Rae Jean Hemway, Myra H. Wyckoff, Jeffrey M. Perlman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

53 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Current neonatal guidelines endorse both the two-thumb and the two-finger techniques for performing chest compressions. It remains unclear whether one method is superior to the other in achieving consistent depth. Objective: To compare the compression depth, variability, rate and finger placement of the two-thumb and two-finger techniques using a compression to ventilation (CV) ratio of 3:1. Methods: 25 subjects (physicians and neonatal nurses) participated with compressions performed on a manikin. Subjects were video recorded. Evaluations included continuous compression administered for 60 s, followed by 2 min of compressions using a 3:1 CV ratio for each of the two techniques. Results: Depth during 60 s of uninterrupted compressions was greater for the two-thumb than the two-finger technique (27.2±5.7 vs 22.1±4.6 mm; p=0.0008), variability was less (6.7%±3.2% vs 9.0%±2.8%; p=0.002) and rate was comparable (118±22 vs 116±24 compressions/min). With a 3:1 CV ratio, depth was greater for the two-thumb compared to the two-finger method (29±5.4 vs 23.7±5.8 mm; p=0.0009), variability was less (6.1%±2.9% vs 9.8%±3.1%; p=0.00002) and rate was comparable (192±26 vs 197±31 compressions/2 min). Correct positioning was accomplished more often with the two-thumb than the two-finger technique (21/25 vs 3/25; p=0.0005). Conclusions: The two-thumb technique is superior to the two-finger technique, achieving greater depth and less variability with each compression. The two-finger technique was incorrectly applied in most cases and deviations in technique may have contributed to the significant differences in depth.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalArchives of Disease in Childhood: Fetal and Neonatal Edition
Volume96
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2011

Fingerprint

Manikins
Thumb
Resuscitation
Fingers
Thorax
Ventilation
Guidelines
Physicians

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

The two-thumb is superior to the two-finger method for administering chest compressions in a manikin model of neonatal resuscitation. / Christman, Catherine; Hemway, Rae Jean; Wyckoff, Myra H.; Perlman, Jeffrey M.

In: Archives of Disease in Childhood: Fetal and Neonatal Edition, Vol. 96, No. 2, 03.2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{7ca98c6e063640f7873e38193734425e,
title = "The two-thumb is superior to the two-finger method for administering chest compressions in a manikin model of neonatal resuscitation",
abstract = "Background: Current neonatal guidelines endorse both the two-thumb and the two-finger techniques for performing chest compressions. It remains unclear whether one method is superior to the other in achieving consistent depth. Objective: To compare the compression depth, variability, rate and finger placement of the two-thumb and two-finger techniques using a compression to ventilation (CV) ratio of 3:1. Methods: 25 subjects (physicians and neonatal nurses) participated with compressions performed on a manikin. Subjects were video recorded. Evaluations included continuous compression administered for 60 s, followed by 2 min of compressions using a 3:1 CV ratio for each of the two techniques. Results: Depth during 60 s of uninterrupted compressions was greater for the two-thumb than the two-finger technique (27.2±5.7 vs 22.1±4.6 mm; p=0.0008), variability was less (6.7{\%}±3.2{\%} vs 9.0{\%}±2.8{\%}; p=0.002) and rate was comparable (118±22 vs 116±24 compressions/min). With a 3:1 CV ratio, depth was greater for the two-thumb compared to the two-finger method (29±5.4 vs 23.7±5.8 mm; p=0.0009), variability was less (6.1{\%}±2.9{\%} vs 9.8{\%}±3.1{\%}; p=0.00002) and rate was comparable (192±26 vs 197±31 compressions/2 min). Correct positioning was accomplished more often with the two-thumb than the two-finger technique (21/25 vs 3/25; p=0.0005). Conclusions: The two-thumb technique is superior to the two-finger technique, achieving greater depth and less variability with each compression. The two-finger technique was incorrectly applied in most cases and deviations in technique may have contributed to the significant differences in depth.",
author = "Catherine Christman and Hemway, {Rae Jean} and Wyckoff, {Myra H.} and Perlman, {Jeffrey M.}",
year = "2011",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1136/adc.2009.180406",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "96",
journal = "Archives of Disease in Childhood: Fetal and Neonatal Edition",
issn = "1359-2998",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The two-thumb is superior to the two-finger method for administering chest compressions in a manikin model of neonatal resuscitation

AU - Christman, Catherine

AU - Hemway, Rae Jean

AU - Wyckoff, Myra H.

AU - Perlman, Jeffrey M.

PY - 2011/3

Y1 - 2011/3

N2 - Background: Current neonatal guidelines endorse both the two-thumb and the two-finger techniques for performing chest compressions. It remains unclear whether one method is superior to the other in achieving consistent depth. Objective: To compare the compression depth, variability, rate and finger placement of the two-thumb and two-finger techniques using a compression to ventilation (CV) ratio of 3:1. Methods: 25 subjects (physicians and neonatal nurses) participated with compressions performed on a manikin. Subjects were video recorded. Evaluations included continuous compression administered for 60 s, followed by 2 min of compressions using a 3:1 CV ratio for each of the two techniques. Results: Depth during 60 s of uninterrupted compressions was greater for the two-thumb than the two-finger technique (27.2±5.7 vs 22.1±4.6 mm; p=0.0008), variability was less (6.7%±3.2% vs 9.0%±2.8%; p=0.002) and rate was comparable (118±22 vs 116±24 compressions/min). With a 3:1 CV ratio, depth was greater for the two-thumb compared to the two-finger method (29±5.4 vs 23.7±5.8 mm; p=0.0009), variability was less (6.1%±2.9% vs 9.8%±3.1%; p=0.00002) and rate was comparable (192±26 vs 197±31 compressions/2 min). Correct positioning was accomplished more often with the two-thumb than the two-finger technique (21/25 vs 3/25; p=0.0005). Conclusions: The two-thumb technique is superior to the two-finger technique, achieving greater depth and less variability with each compression. The two-finger technique was incorrectly applied in most cases and deviations in technique may have contributed to the significant differences in depth.

AB - Background: Current neonatal guidelines endorse both the two-thumb and the two-finger techniques for performing chest compressions. It remains unclear whether one method is superior to the other in achieving consistent depth. Objective: To compare the compression depth, variability, rate and finger placement of the two-thumb and two-finger techniques using a compression to ventilation (CV) ratio of 3:1. Methods: 25 subjects (physicians and neonatal nurses) participated with compressions performed on a manikin. Subjects were video recorded. Evaluations included continuous compression administered for 60 s, followed by 2 min of compressions using a 3:1 CV ratio for each of the two techniques. Results: Depth during 60 s of uninterrupted compressions was greater for the two-thumb than the two-finger technique (27.2±5.7 vs 22.1±4.6 mm; p=0.0008), variability was less (6.7%±3.2% vs 9.0%±2.8%; p=0.002) and rate was comparable (118±22 vs 116±24 compressions/min). With a 3:1 CV ratio, depth was greater for the two-thumb compared to the two-finger method (29±5.4 vs 23.7±5.8 mm; p=0.0009), variability was less (6.1%±2.9% vs 9.8%±3.1%; p=0.00002) and rate was comparable (192±26 vs 197±31 compressions/2 min). Correct positioning was accomplished more often with the two-thumb than the two-finger technique (21/25 vs 3/25; p=0.0005). Conclusions: The two-thumb technique is superior to the two-finger technique, achieving greater depth and less variability with each compression. The two-finger technique was incorrectly applied in most cases and deviations in technique may have contributed to the significant differences in depth.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79951675459&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79951675459&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/adc.2009.180406

DO - 10.1136/adc.2009.180406

M3 - Article

C2 - 20847197

AN - SCOPUS:79951675459

VL - 96

JO - Archives of Disease in Childhood: Fetal and Neonatal Edition

JF - Archives of Disease in Childhood: Fetal and Neonatal Edition

SN - 1359-2998

IS - 2

ER -