Two-thumb technique is superior to two-finger technique during lone rescuer infant manikin CPR

Abstract Objective Infant CPR guidelines recommend two-finger chest compression with a lone rescuer and two-thumb with two rescuers. Two-thumb provides better chest compression but is perceived to be associated with increased ventilation hands-off time. We hypothesized that lone rescuer two-thumb CPR is associated with increased ventilation cycle time, decreased ventilation quality and fewer chest compressions compared to two-finger CPR in an infant manikin model. Design Crossover observational study randomizing 34 healthcare providers to perform 2 min CPR at a compression rate of 100 min −1 using a 30:2 compression:ventilation ratio comparing two-thumb vs. two-finger techniques. Methods A Laerdal™ Baby ALS Trainer manikin was modified to digitally record compression rate, compression depth and compression pressure and ventilation cycle time (two mouth-to-mouth breaths). Manikin chest rise with breaths was video recorded and later reviewed by two blinded CPR instructors for percent effective breaths. Data (mean ± SD) were analyzed using a two-tailed paired t -test. Significance was defined qualitatively as p  ≤ 0.05. Result Mean % effective breaths were 90 ± 18.6% in two-thumb and 88.9 ± 21.1% in two-finger, p  = 0.65. Mean time (s) to deliver two mouth-to-mouth breaths was 7.6 ± 1.6 in two-thumb and 7.0 ± 1.5 in two-finger, p p  = 0.0005. Two-thumb resulted in significantly higher compression depth and compression pressure compared to the two-finger technique. Conclusion Healthcare providers required 0.6 s longer time to deliver two breaths during two-thumb lone rescuer infant CPR, but there was no significant difference in percent effective breaths delivered between the two techniques. Two-thumb CPR had 4 fewer delivered compressions per minute, which may be offset by far more effective compression depth and compression pressure compared to two-finger technique.