Abstract 15161: Stretchable Electronic Wearable' Sensors Allow Quantitative Assessment of CPR

• Published in: Circulation (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2018-11, Vol.138 (Suppl_1 Suppl 1), p.A15161-A15161
• Main Authors: Li, Maxwell, Weiner, Yonatan E, Harhash, Ahmed, Ammann, Kaitlyn R, Slepian, Rebecca, Kern, Karl B, Slepian, Marvin J
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 0009-7322; 1524-4539

IntroductionA critical determinant of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) efficacy is administration of compressions of adequate frequency and depth. Current attempts at assessing CPR compression have largely been observational and qualitative. Recent advances in material science have allowed for fabrication of conformal “wearable” motion sensors capable of measuring displacement, velocity, and acceleration. We tested the hypothesis that a wearable motion sensor applied to a CPR subject will permit quantitative assessment of compression parameters allowing comparative performance analysis.MethodsA stretchable electronic motion sensor (MC10 BioStampRC® with embedded accelerometer and gyroscope) was applied to the mid-thorax of a CPR mannequin. Certified and uncertified CPR provider volunteers performed standard compression-only CPR for 60 sec while quantitative motion signals were recorded continuously. A LUCAS™ CPR compression system was used as control. Compression acceleration, frequency, and fatigue were compared.ResultsUncertified participants showed significant deterioration of compression quality (fatigue) (p = 0.02) (Fig 1A). Mean peak accelerations (Fig 1B) between certified (1.49 ± 0.19 m/s) and uncertified (0.95 ± 0.13 m/s) participants differed significantly (p = 0.03). The compression frequencies of the certified (160 ± 7.0 min) was higher than the uncertified (137 ± 13 min), though not achieving statistical significance (p = 0.13).ConclusionWearable motion sensors allow continuous detection of quantitative parameters of CPR performance, revealing significant differences between the performance groups. These systems may be readily employed in the field for assessment, training, and research purposes, ultimately affording enhancement of overall CPR efficacy.Fig 1. A) CPR compression sample, acceleration vs. time. B) Mean peak accelerations of volunteers, certified and uncertified, and LUCAS control.