Public attitudes towards cardiopulmonary resuscitation training and performance in Singapore

5Citations
Citations of this article
39Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) rates remain fairly low through most communities despite multiple interventions through the years. Understanding the attitudes and fears behind CPR training and performance would help target education and training to raise the rates of bystander CPR and consequently survival rates of victims. 7909 participants at a single-day mass CPR training session in Singapore were given survey questionnaires to fill out. 6473 people submitted completed forms upon the conclusion of the training session. Some issues looked at were the overall level of difficulty of CPR, difficulty levels of specific skills, attitudes towards refresher training, attitudes towards performing CPR, and fears when doing so. Results: The mean level of difficulty of CPR was rated 3.98 (scale of 1–10), with those with previous CPR training rating it easier. The skills rated most difficult were performing mouth-to-mouth breathing and chest compressions, while the easiest rated was recognizing non-responsiveness. A majority (69.7%) would agree to go for refresher training every 2 years and 88.7% felt everyone should be trained in CPR. 71.6% would perform full CPR for a member of the public in cardiac arrest and only 20.7% would prefer to only do chest compressions. The most cited fear was a low level of confidence, and fears of acquiring infections or aversion to mouth-to-mouth breathing were low. Conclusions: The survey results show that most participants in Singapore are keen to perform conventional CPR for a member of the public and can help to target future CPR training accordingly.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Roy Chowdhury, S., & Anantharaman, V. (2021). Public attitudes towards cardiopulmonary resuscitation training and performance in Singapore. International Journal of Emergency Medicine, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12245-021-00378-1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free