DOI: 10.5061/dryad.9w0vt4brg
title: Data from: The influence of real-time feedback on the quality of resuscitation: a prospective study comparing bystanders, paramedic course participants, and emergency physician trainee

description: The aim of this study was to analyze the potential benefits of real-time
 feedback in resuscitation training for participants in the prehospital
 emergency chain and to compare differences in the quality of chest
 compressions (CC) with and without feedback. The primary endpoint was to
 analyze the proportion of CC achieving the recommended depth (5-6cm) and
 frequency (100-120 / min) during two minutes of CC. This prospective
 cohort study compares bystanders (N = 75), paramedic trainees (N = 75),
 and emergency physician trainees (N = 75) with and without the feedback
 system of the Zoll X-Series®. Without feedback, paramedics (P) achieved
 the target compression frequency in 82.7 %, bystanders (B) in 49.8 % and
 emergency physician trainees (EP) in 75% (P vs. B, p &lt; 0.001; EP
 vs. P, p = 0.759; EP vs. B, p = 0,217). There were no significant
 differences in target compression depth without feedback. With feedback, P
 achieved the compression frequency in 90.7%, B in 72.8% and EP in 91.4% (P
 vs. B, p &lt; 0.001; EP vs. P, p = 0.425; EP vs. B, p &lt; 0.001.
 With feedback, P achieved the compression depth in 56.9%, B in 47.3 % and
 EP in 75.1 % (P vs. B, p = 0.759; EP vs. P, p = 0.217; EP vs. B, p =
 0.002). The results underscore the importance of real-time feedback in
 emergency medical training, especially for B. All cohorts showed
 significant improvement, indicating that feedback enhances CC and promotes
 skill development. Given the importance of high-quality CC, their early
 optimization in the training is essential. This highlights the need for
 standardized training concepts, including timing recommendations for
 feedback systems. Future studies should consider real-life pre-hospital
 conditions and investigate chest compression to validate transferability
 to real-life scenarios.
description: *Study design<br> *The prospective cohort study was
 approved by the ethics committee of “Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg”
 (E-01-20200403). *Participants/study
 population<br> *The recruitment and data collection were conducted
 at the state-recognized emergency medical school in Berlin. A total of 225
 participants from first aid classes (B), paramedic classes (P), and
 emergency classes for physicians (EP) voluntarily participated in the
 study outside of class hours. Before the start of the study, the B
 participants acquired theoretical knowledge on performing chest
 compressions (CC). At the time of data collection, the P cohort had
 completed four weeks of theoretical and practical instructions and was
 about to begin hospital and ambulance internships. The EP cohort consisted
 of licensed physicians participating in an emergency physician
 class.  *Study setting and procedure<br> *The
 resuscitation simulator AmbuMan® was equipped with the feedback system of
 the Zoll X-Series®. Initially participants performed a two-minute chest
 compression (CC) without the visibility of real-time feedback. After a
 break of two minutes, another CC for two minutes was performed, this time
 with real-time feedback. *Data collection <br>
 *Data collection took place from October 2020 to January 2021. The focus
 of the resuscitation analysis was on evaluating the compression depth
 within the target range and the compression rate within the target. The
 reference values are specified by the resuscitation guidelines [5]. The
 compression depth should be between 5–6 cm. The compression rate should be
 between 100–120 compressions per minute [5]. "Above the target
 range" referred to compressions with a depth &gt;  6 cm or a
 compression rate &gt; 120 compressions per minute. "Below the
 target range" was defined as a compression depth of less than 5 cm or
 a compression rate &lt; 100 compressions per minute.
 *Analysis<br> *The evaluation of the results was conducted
 using the "RescueNet Code Review" program, which compares
 compression depth and rate with the specified guideline parameters.
 Statistical analysis of the collected data was performed using the
 statistical software SPSS Version 28 (IBM). To describe the central
 tendency in cases of uneven data distribution or ordinal data, the median
 with the 25th–75th percentile was used. The comparison of the three
 independent groups was performed using the Mann-Whitney U test, as the
 data were not parametrically distributed. Categorical variables were
 compared using the Chi-square test. The results are presented in tables
 and graphs as box plots or as absolute numbers with percentage
 shares.
description: # **The influence of real-time feedback on the quality of resuscitation: A
 prospective study comparing bystanders, paramedic course participants, and
 emergency physician trainees** ## Description of the data and file
 structure This dataset contains quantitative performance data on chest
 compressions (CC) obtained from a prospective cohort study conducted at
 the state-recognized emergency medical service school “NAW Berlin.” The
 study investigated whether real-time feedback improves resuscitation
 quality across three participant groups: bystanders, paramedic course
 participants, and emergency physician trainees. Each of the 225
 participants performed two standardized 2-minute chest compression trials
 on a resuscitation simulator (AmbuMan®) with a real-time feedback system
 (Zoll X-Series®): 1. One trial without feedback (WoF) 2. One trial with
 feedback (WF) Both trials were performed under identical, standardized
 conditions. The feedback system displayed and recorded compression depth
 and frequency; chest recoil was visible on the monitor but not exportable
 by the evaluation software (RescueNet Code Review). The study focused
 on depth (cm) and rate (compressions per minute) as the key quality
 indicators according to European Resuscitation Council (ERC) Guidelines
 2021. Ethical approval was obtained from the Brandenburg Medical School
 Ethics Committee (E-01-20200403). All participants provided written
 informed consent prior to participation. ### Files and variables ####
 File: DataTable_Manuscript_comparisonProfession_GMS_281124_SKK.csv
 **Description:** The dataset includes 225 anonymized participant records,
 one per row. Each record contains two performance trials (with and without
 feedback), including mean values, counts, and percentages of compressions
 within and outside target ranges. ##### Variables * participant: Anonymous
 participant ID * age: Age in years * sex: Biological Sex (1 = male, 2 =
 female) * group: B = Bystander, P = Paramedic Course Participant, EP =
 Emergency Physician Trainee * @2m_WoF_D_CompressionFraction: 2 minute
 trial without feedback depth compression fraction *
 @2m_WoF_D_DepthAverage: 2 minute trial without feedback depth average *
 @2m_WoF_D_Total_CC: 2 minute trial without feedback depth total chest
 compressions * @2m_WoF_D_DepthTarget: 2 minute trial without feedback
 depth target (5-6 cm) * @2m_WoF_D_DepthTargetPercent: 2 minute trial
 without feedback depth target in percent * @2m_WoF_D_DepthAboveTarget: 2
 minute trial without feedback depth above target (&gt; 6 cm) *
 @2m_WoF_D_DepthAbovePercent: 2 minute trial without feedback depth above
 in percent  * @2m_WoF_D_DepthBelowTarget: 2 minute trial without feedback
 depth below target (&lt; 5 cm) * @2m_WoF_D_DepthBelowPercent: 2 minute
 trial without feedback depth below in percent *
 @2m_WoF_D_DepthStandardDeviation: 2 minute trial without feedback depth
 standard deviation * @2m_WoF_F_AverageFrequency: 2 minute trial without
 feedback average frequency * @2m_WoF_F_FrequencyTarget: 2 minute trial
 without feedback frequency target (100-120 / min) *
 @2m_WoF_F_FrequencyTargetPercent: 2 minute trial without feedback
 frequency target in percent * @2m_WoF_F_FrequencyAboveTarget: 2 minute
 trial without feedback frequency above target (&gt; 120 / min) * @2m_WoF
 \_F_FrequencyAbovePercent: 2 minute trial without feedback frequency above
 target in percent * @2m_WoF_F_FrequencyBelowTarget: 2 minute trial without
 feedback frequency below target ( &lt; 100 / min) *
 @2m_WoF_F_FrequencyBelowPercent: 2 minute trial without feedback frequency
 below in percent * @2m_WoF_F_FrequencyStandardDeviation: 2 minute trial
 without feedback frequency standard deviation *
 @2m_WF_D_CompressionFraction: 2 minute trial with feedback depth
 compression fraction * @2m_WF_D_AverageDepth: 2 minute trial with feedback
 depth average depth *  @2m_WF_D_Total_CC: 2 minute trial with feedback
 depth total chest compressions * @2m_WF_D_DepthTarget: 2 minute trial with
 feedback depth target (5-6 cm) * @2m_WF_D_DepthTargetPercent: 2 minute
 trial with feedback depth target in percent  * @2m_WF_D_DepthAboveTarget:
 2 minute trial with feedback depth above target (&gt; 6 cm) *
 @2m_WF_D_DepthAbovePercent: 2 minute trial with feedback depth above
 percent  * @2m_WF_D_DepthBelowTarget: 2 minute trial with feedback depth
 below target (&lt; 5 cm) * @2m_WF_D_DepthBelowPercent: 2 minute trial with
 depth below target percent * @2m_WF_D_DepthStandardDeviation: 2 minute
 trial with feedback depth standard deviation  * @2m_WF_F_AverageFrequency:
 2 minute trial with feedback frequency average  frequency *
 @2m_WF_F_FrequencyTarget: 2 minute trial with feedback frequency target
 (100-120/min) * @2m_WF_F_FrequencyTargetPercent: 2 minute trial with
 feedback frequency target percent * @2m_WF_F_FrequencyAboveTarget: 2
 minute trial with feedback frequency above target (&gt; 120 / min) *
 @2m_WF_F_FrequencyAbovePercent: 2 minute trial with feedback frequency
 above target percent * @2m_WF_F_FrequencyBelowTarget: 2 minute trial with
 feedback frequency below target (&lt; 100 / min) *
 @2m_WF_F_FrequencyBelowPercent: 2 minute trial with feedback frequency
 below percent * @2m_WF_F_FrequencyStandardDeviation: 2 minute trial with
 feedback frequency standard deviation * agegroup1: four category age
 group: 1 = 16-20, 2 = 21-30, 3 = 31-40, 4 = 41-56 * agegroup2: three
 category age group: 1 = 16-25, 2 = 26-35, 3 = 36-56 * ageMedian:
 dichotomized age (1 = &lt;28 years, 2 = &gt;28 years) * agegroup3: binary
 age split (1 = &lt;30 years, 2 = &gt;30 years) * AG_B: age group Bystander
 * AG_EP: age group emergency physician * AG_P: age group paramedics *
 Diff_WF_WoF_FreqTarg_p: Difference of with feedback and without feedback
 frequency target percent * Diff_WF_WoF_DepTarg_p: Difference of with
 feedback and without feedback depth target percent Note: comma used as
 decimal delimiter within .csv file ## Code/software Data analyses were
 conducted using: * SPSS Version 28 (IBM) * RescueNet Code Review (data
 extraction) * Microsoft Excel / Word for Mac, Version 16.16.27 ## Access
 information Other publicly accessible locations of the data: * Data are
 only available in this Dryad repository Data was derived from the
 following sources: * All data were collected prospectively as part of the
 study and were not derived from other sources.