Evidence & Clinical Updates — 23 October 2026
23rd October 2026
Brian Carlin
A selection of recent research on resuscitation and anaphylaxis, with practical lessons for healthcare-professional training.
CPR knowledge needs regular checking
Hospital nurses’ knowledge of adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a systematic review
BMC Nursing — 17 October 2026
This review brought together 25 studies involving 4,653 hospital nurses across 17 countries. Nurses’ objectively assessed CPR knowledge was frequently described as incomplete or intermediate. The researchers also found major differences in the questions, scoring systems and pass standards used between studies, making direct comparisons difficult. The findings support regular refresher training and periodic assessment, alongside validated, role-appropriate assessment tools. As every included study was cross-sectional, the review cannot show which training approach produces better clinical performance or patient outcomes.
Why it matters for training: Assessment should identify specific knowledge gaps and guide further practice; course completion alone does not demonstrate retained competence.
Anaphylaxis preparedness in dental practice
Optimizing emergency management of anaphylaxis in dentistry: a systematic review of current practices
International Archives of Allergy and Immunology — 16 October 2026
The review examined 55 published cases of dental-related anaphylaxis. More than three quarters occurred within 30 minutes, with dental materials, anaesthetic combinations, antibiotics, chlorhexidine and lidocaine among the reported triggers. Presentations varied: some began with skin symptoms, while others featured hypotension or gastrointestinal symptoms. Adrenaline was documented in only 56% of cases, and the recommended intramuscular route in fewer than 8%. These figures require caution because the evidence consists of selected case reports and cannot indicate normal practice or incidence.
Why it matters for training: Dental teams need scenarios that include anaphylaxis without an obvious rash and practical rehearsal of prompt intramuscular adrenaline administration.
Look beyond the overall CPR manikin score
Association of Chest Compression Depth, Rate, and Spring Resistance with “Quality CardioPulmonary Resuscitation” (QCPR) Scores in a Manikin Model
Journal of Medical Systems — 5 October 2026
This controlled manikin study examined how compression depth, rate and chest-spring resistance affected the overall QCPR score. Compression depth had the greatest influence, but identical depth and rate settings produced score differences of up to 18% when spring resistance changed. Some compressions outside recommended ranges still achieved high overall scores. This suggests that a single percentage score can conceal important performance details. The experiment used one manikin and mechanically delivered continuous compressions, so its findings need confirmation and may not fully represent human CPR with ventilation.
Why it matters for training: Instructors should review individual CPR measurements alongside the overall manikin score when giving feedback and assessing performance.
Implications for teaching
- Use brief, role-specific knowledge checks to identify areas needing further teaching.
- Discuss individual CPR measurements alongside the manikin’s overall score.
- Use consistent manikin resistance settings when comparing assessments.
- Include dental anaphylaxis scenarios without a prominent rash, assessing recognition and timely treatment.
These findings support refinements to teaching and assessment. They do not justify changing established treatment algorithms.
Recent articles
