标准心肺复苏（S-CPR）和头顶心肺复苏（OTH-CPR）结果的比较：系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 1.3 4区医学 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE

Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2025-08-20 DOI:10.1016/j.jemermed.2025.08.023

Seyyed-Abolfazl Tabatabaei-Aghda MSc , Ebrahim Nasiri-Formi Ph.D , Seyyed-Jamaleddin Tabatabaei-Aghda MSc

{"title":"标准心肺复苏（S-CPR）和头顶心肺复苏（OTH-CPR）结果的比较：系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Seyyed-Abolfazl Tabatabaei-Aghda MSc , Ebrahim Nasiri-Formi Ph.D , Seyyed-Jamaleddin Tabatabaei-Aghda MSc","doi":"10.1016/j.jemermed.2025.08.023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Different conditions and methods of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can yield varying results.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This systematic review aimed to compare the outcomes of Over-the-Head CPR (OTH<img>CPR) with Standard or Lateral CPR (S-CPR), Following PRISMA guidelines,</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Following the PRISMA guidelines, we searched 6 databases and retrieved 111 articles. After excluding duplicates and irrelevant studies, 14 articles were selected for analysis. The outcomes assessed included the average rate of correct chest compressions per minute, the average depth of compressions, the rate of high-quality ventilations, and correct chest recoil.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The meta-analysis indicated that OTH<img>CPR had a significantly higher average compression rate compared to S-CPR (Mean Differences = 0.13, CI 95% = –0.01 to 0.27, I<sup>2</sup> = 18.96%). However, there was no significant difference in compression depth (CI 95% = –0.38 to 0.40, MD = 0.009) or ventilation quality (CI 95% = –0.69 to 0.69, MD = –0.00). While OTH<img>CPR showed a higher rate of correct chest recoil, this difference was not statistically significant (CI 95% = –0.96 to 2.59, MD = 0.81).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The findings suggest that OTH<img>CPR is comparable in quality to S-CPR and may serve as an effective alternative in specific situations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16085,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":"78 ","pages":"Pages 275-290"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Outcomes between Standard Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (S-CPR) and Over-the-Head Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (OTH-CPR): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Seyyed-Abolfazl Tabatabaei-Aghda MSc , Ebrahim Nasiri-Formi Ph.D , Seyyed-Jamaleddin Tabatabaei-Aghda MSc\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jemermed.2025.08.023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Different conditions and methods of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can yield varying results.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This systematic review aimed to compare the outcomes of Over-the-Head CPR (OTH<img>CPR) with Standard or Lateral CPR (S-CPR), Following PRISMA guidelines,</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Following the PRISMA guidelines, we searched 6 databases and retrieved 111 articles. After excluding duplicates and irrelevant studies, 14 articles were selected for analysis. The outcomes assessed included the average rate of correct chest compressions per minute, the average depth of compressions, the rate of high-quality ventilations, and correct chest recoil.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The meta-analysis indicated that OTH<img>CPR had a significantly higher average compression rate compared to S-CPR (Mean Differences = 0.13, CI 95% = –0.01 to 0.27, I<sup>2</sup> = 18.96%). However, there was no significant difference in compression depth (CI 95% = –0.38 to 0.40, MD = 0.009) or ventilation quality (CI 95% = –0.69 to 0.69, MD = –0.00). While OTH<img>CPR showed a higher rate of correct chest recoil, this difference was not statistically significant (CI 95% = –0.96 to 2.59, MD = 0.81).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The findings suggest that OTH<img>CPR is comparable in quality to S-CPR and may serve as an effective alternative in specific situations.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16085,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\"78 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 275-290\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0736467925003312\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0736467925003312","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

不同的心肺复苏条件和方法会产生不同的结果。目的本系统综述旨在比较头顶心肺复苏术（OTHCPR）与标准或侧位心肺复苏术（S-CPR）的结果，遵循PRISMA指南，方法遵循PRISMA指南，我们检索了6个数据库并检索了111篇文章。在排除重复和不相关研究后，选择14篇文章进行分析。评估的结果包括每分钟正确胸腔按压的平均频率、平均按压深度、高质量通气的频率和正确胸腔后坐力。结果meta分析显示，与S-CPR相比，OTHCPR的平均压缩率显著高于S-CPR（平均差异= 0.13,CI 95% = -0.01 ~ 0.27, I2 = 18.96%）。然而，两组在压缩深度（CI 95% = -0.38 ~ 0.40, MD = 0.009）和通气质量（CI 95% = -0.69 ~ 0.69, MD = -0.00）方面无显著差异。虽然OTHCPR显示更高的正确胸部后坐力率，但差异无统计学意义（CI 95% = -0.96 ~ 2.59, MD = 0.81）。结论：本研究结果表明，其他心肺复苏术在质量上与S-CPR相当，在特定情况下可以作为一种有效的替代方法。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Comparison of Outcomes between Standard Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (S-CPR) and Over-the-Head Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (OTH-CPR): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Different conditions and methods of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) can yield varying results.

Objectives

This systematic review aimed to compare the outcomes of Over-the-Head CPR (OTHCPR) with Standard or Lateral CPR (S-CPR), Following PRISMA guidelines,

Methods

Following the PRISMA guidelines, we searched 6 databases and retrieved 111 articles. After excluding duplicates and irrelevant studies, 14 articles were selected for analysis. The outcomes assessed included the average rate of correct chest compressions per minute, the average depth of compressions, the rate of high-quality ventilations, and correct chest recoil.

Results

The meta-analysis indicated that OTHCPR had a significantly higher average compression rate compared to S-CPR (Mean Differences = 0.13, CI 95% = –0.01 to 0.27, I² = 18.96%). However, there was no significant difference in compression depth (CI 95% = –0.38 to 0.40, MD = 0.009) or ventilation quality (CI 95% = –0.69 to 0.69, MD = –0.00). While OTHCPR showed a higher rate of correct chest recoil, this difference was not statistically significant (CI 95% = –0.96 to 2.59, MD = 0.81).

Conclusions

The findings suggest that OTHCPR is comparable in quality to S-CPR and may serve as an effective alternative in specific situations.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Emergency Medicine 医学-急救医学

CiteScore

2.40

自引率

6.70%

发文量

339

审稿时长

2-4 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Emergency Medicine is an international, peer-reviewed publication featuring original contributions of interest to both the academic and practicing emergency physician. JEM, published monthly, contains research papers and clinical studies as well as articles focusing on the training of emergency physicians and on the practice of emergency medicine. The Journal features the following sections: • Original Contributions • Clinical Communications: Pediatric, Adult, OB/GYN • Selected Topics: Toxicology, Prehospital Care, The Difficult Airway, Aeromedical Emergencies, Disaster Medicine, Cardiology Commentary, Emergency Radiology, Critical Care, Sports Medicine, Wound Care • Techniques and Procedures • Technical Tips • Clinical Laboratory in Emergency Medicine • Pharmacology in Emergency Medicine • Case Presentations of the Harvard Emergency Medicine Residency • Visual Diagnosis in Emergency Medicine • Medical Classics • Emergency Forum • Editorial(s) • Letters to the Editor • Education • Administration of Emergency Medicine • International Emergency Medicine • Computers in Emergency Medicine • Violence: Recognition, Management, and Prevention • Ethics • Humanities and Medicine • American Academy of Emergency Medicine • AAEM Medical Student Forum • Book and Other Media Reviews • Calendar of Events • Abstracts • Trauma Reports • Ultrasound in Emergency Medicine