一项随机的探索性研究,比较了在模拟心脏骤停的六个月时间框架内,救护车临床医生气囊-瓣膜-面罩通气的单次反馈与定期反馈和无反馈。

Graham McClelland, Karl Charlton, Benjamin Kirk, Laura Blair, Sarah Hepburn, Owen Finney, Kate Snowdon
{"title":"一项随机的探索性研究,比较了在模拟心脏骤停的六个月时间框架内,救护车临床医生气囊-瓣膜-面罩通气的单次反馈与定期反馈和无反馈。","authors":"Graham McClelland, Karl Charlton, Benjamin Kirk, Laura Blair, Sarah Hepburn, Owen Finney, Kate Snowdon","doi":"10.29045/14784726.2026.3.10.4.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Ventilation with a bag-valve-mask is a standard part of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed by ambulance clinicians. Ventilation quality has received little attention until recently, when ventilation feedback devices (VFDs) became available. Evidence suggests that clinicians struggle to ventilate according to guidelines without feedback and that a VFD improves ventilation quality. This study explored the impact of regular VFD use compared with a single episode of VFD use and no VFD use on ventilation quality during simulated CPR across a six-month period.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study comprised a single-site, exploratory, randomised controlled trial conducted in North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust. Participants completed six-minute CPR scenarios, with ventilation quality recorded, repeated three times over six months. Participants were randomised 1:1:1 to ventilation feedback at each session, feedback at the first session only or no feedback (control). The primary outcome was ventilation quality (rate and volume) at the final study session.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study ran from February to July 2025 and included 51 participants, mostly male (82%), with a median age of 39 years (IQR 33-45), who were primarily paramedics (92%). Participants completed 150 study sessions, generating 15.5 hours of ventilation data. There was a clear difference in ventilation quality (rate and volume) with VFD versus no VFD. The ventilation quality of the group that had feedback at only the first session declined sharply when feedback was removed, and by the third (final) study session this group was statistically no different from the control group. VFD use reduced instances of hyper- and hypoventilation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This simulation-based, exploratory, randomised controlled trial demonstrated that VFD use improved the ability of ambulance clinicians to ventilate according to guidelines but when the VFD was removed, they rapidly reverted to a low level of compliance. Future work needs to study VFD use in clinical practice and to explore any impact on patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72470,"journal":{"name":"British paramedic journal","volume":"10 4","pages":"8-17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12969957/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A randomised, exploratory study comparing a single episode of feedback with regular feedback and no feedback on ambulance clinician bag-valve-mask ventilation during a simulated cardiac arrest over a six-month time frame.\",\"authors\":\"Graham McClelland, Karl Charlton, Benjamin Kirk, Laura Blair, Sarah Hepburn, Owen Finney, Kate Snowdon\",\"doi\":\"10.29045/14784726.2026.3.10.4.8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Ventilation with a bag-valve-mask is a standard part of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed by ambulance clinicians. Ventilation quality has received little attention until recently, when ventilation feedback devices (VFDs) became available. Evidence suggests that clinicians struggle to ventilate according to guidelines without feedback and that a VFD improves ventilation quality. This study explored the impact of regular VFD use compared with a single episode of VFD use and no VFD use on ventilation quality during simulated CPR across a six-month period.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study comprised a single-site, exploratory, randomised controlled trial conducted in North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust. Participants completed six-minute CPR scenarios, with ventilation quality recorded, repeated three times over six months. Participants were randomised 1:1:1 to ventilation feedback at each session, feedback at the first session only or no feedback (control). The primary outcome was ventilation quality (rate and volume) at the final study session.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study ran from February to July 2025 and included 51 participants, mostly male (82%), with a median age of 39 years (IQR 33-45), who were primarily paramedics (92%). Participants completed 150 study sessions, generating 15.5 hours of ventilation data. There was a clear difference in ventilation quality (rate and volume) with VFD versus no VFD. The ventilation quality of the group that had feedback at only the first session declined sharply when feedback was removed, and by the third (final) study session this group was statistically no different from the control group. VFD use reduced instances of hyper- and hypoventilation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This simulation-based, exploratory, randomised controlled trial demonstrated that VFD use improved the ability of ambulance clinicians to ventilate according to guidelines but when the VFD was removed, they rapidly reverted to a low level of compliance. Future work needs to study VFD use in clinical practice and to explore any impact on patient outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72470,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British paramedic journal\",\"volume\":\"10 4\",\"pages\":\"8-17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12969957/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British paramedic journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29045/14784726.2026.3.10.4.8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British paramedic journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29045/14784726.2026.3.10.4.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:气囊-瓣膜-面罩通气是救护车临床医生进行心肺复苏(CPR)的标准部分。通风质量很少受到关注,直到最近,当通风反馈装置(vfd)可用。有证据表明,临床医生在没有反馈的情况下很难根据指南进行通气,而VFD可提高通气质量。本研究探讨了在六个月的模拟心肺复苏期间,定期使用VFD与单次使用VFD和不使用VFD对通气质量的影响。方法:该研究包括在东北救护车服务NHS基金会信托进行的单点、探索性、随机对照试验。参与者完成了六分钟的心肺复苏术,并记录了通气质量,在六个月内重复了三次。参与者按1:1:1的比例随机分配到每次通气反馈、仅在第一次通气反馈或无反馈(对照组)。主要结果是最后研究阶段的通气质量(通气率和通气量)。结果:该研究从2025年2月至7月进行,包括51名参与者,大多数是男性(82%),中位年龄为39岁(IQR 33-45),主要是护理人员(92%)。参与者完成了150次研究,产生了15.5小时的通气数据。有VFD与无VFD的通气质量(速率和容积)有明显差异。仅在第一阶段就有反馈的那一组的通气质量在反馈被移除后急剧下降,到第三(最后)学习阶段,这一组与对照组在统计学上没有差异。VFD减少了通气过度和通气不足的情况。结论:这项基于模拟的探索性随机对照试验表明,VFD的使用提高了救护车临床医生根据指南进行通气的能力,但当VFD被移除时,他们迅速恢复到低水平的依从性。未来的工作需要研究VFD在临床实践中的应用,并探讨其对患者预后的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A randomised, exploratory study comparing a single episode of feedback with regular feedback and no feedback on ambulance clinician bag-valve-mask ventilation during a simulated cardiac arrest over a six-month time frame.

Introduction: Ventilation with a bag-valve-mask is a standard part of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed by ambulance clinicians. Ventilation quality has received little attention until recently, when ventilation feedback devices (VFDs) became available. Evidence suggests that clinicians struggle to ventilate according to guidelines without feedback and that a VFD improves ventilation quality. This study explored the impact of regular VFD use compared with a single episode of VFD use and no VFD use on ventilation quality during simulated CPR across a six-month period.

Methods: The study comprised a single-site, exploratory, randomised controlled trial conducted in North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust. Participants completed six-minute CPR scenarios, with ventilation quality recorded, repeated three times over six months. Participants were randomised 1:1:1 to ventilation feedback at each session, feedback at the first session only or no feedback (control). The primary outcome was ventilation quality (rate and volume) at the final study session.

Results: The study ran from February to July 2025 and included 51 participants, mostly male (82%), with a median age of 39 years (IQR 33-45), who were primarily paramedics (92%). Participants completed 150 study sessions, generating 15.5 hours of ventilation data. There was a clear difference in ventilation quality (rate and volume) with VFD versus no VFD. The ventilation quality of the group that had feedback at only the first session declined sharply when feedback was removed, and by the third (final) study session this group was statistically no different from the control group. VFD use reduced instances of hyper- and hypoventilation.

Conclusion: This simulation-based, exploratory, randomised controlled trial demonstrated that VFD use improved the ability of ambulance clinicians to ventilate according to guidelines but when the VFD was removed, they rapidly reverted to a low level of compliance. Future work needs to study VFD use in clinical practice and to explore any impact on patient outcomes.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书