地面救护车运输条件下的机械与手动胸部按压心肺复苏术。

Julia Fox, René Fiechter, Peter Gerstl, Alfons Url, Heinz Wagner, Thomas F Lüscher, Urs Eriksson, Christophe A Wyss
{"title":"地面救护车运输条件下的机械与手动胸部按压心肺复苏术。","authors":"Julia Fox,&nbsp;René Fiechter,&nbsp;Peter Gerstl,&nbsp;Alfons Url,&nbsp;Heinz Wagner,&nbsp;Thomas F Lüscher,&nbsp;Urs Eriksson,&nbsp;Christophe A Wyss","doi":"10.3109/17482941.2012.735675","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Novel mechanical chest compression devices offer the possibility to transport cardiac arrest patients with ongoing CPR and might shorten significantly the time delay to post-resuscitation care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We simulated an eight-minute cardiac resuscitation situation during ambulance transport using CPR training manikins. We compared teams consisting of two experienced resuscitators with the performance of a mechanical chest compression device (LUCAS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>CPR-performance by two experienced resuscitators demonstrated ambivalent results. Whereas mean compression rate was within the recommended range (103/min, 95% CI: 93-113/min), mean compression depth was closely below the actually recommended compression depth of >5 cm (49.7 mm, 95% CI: 46.1-53.3mm). Nevertheless, only a mean of two thirds (67%) of all compressions were classified as manually correct (defined as sternal compression depth >5 cm). In contrast, the LUCAS device showed a constant and reliable CPR performance (99.96% correctly applied chest compressions correctly applied within the device programmed parameters, P = 0.0162) with almost no variance between the different sequences.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The LUCAS CPR device represents a reliable alternative to manual CPR in a moving ambulance vehicle during emergency evacuation. Furthermore, it needs less human resources and is safer for the EMS personnel.</p>","PeriodicalId":87385,"journal":{"name":"Acute cardiac care","volume":"15 1","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3109/17482941.2012.735675","citationCount":"64","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mechanical versus manual chest compression CPR under ground ambulance transport conditions.\",\"authors\":\"Julia Fox,&nbsp;René Fiechter,&nbsp;Peter Gerstl,&nbsp;Alfons Url,&nbsp;Heinz Wagner,&nbsp;Thomas F Lüscher,&nbsp;Urs Eriksson,&nbsp;Christophe A Wyss\",\"doi\":\"10.3109/17482941.2012.735675\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Novel mechanical chest compression devices offer the possibility to transport cardiac arrest patients with ongoing CPR and might shorten significantly the time delay to post-resuscitation care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We simulated an eight-minute cardiac resuscitation situation during ambulance transport using CPR training manikins. We compared teams consisting of two experienced resuscitators with the performance of a mechanical chest compression device (LUCAS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>CPR-performance by two experienced resuscitators demonstrated ambivalent results. Whereas mean compression rate was within the recommended range (103/min, 95% CI: 93-113/min), mean compression depth was closely below the actually recommended compression depth of >5 cm (49.7 mm, 95% CI: 46.1-53.3mm). Nevertheless, only a mean of two thirds (67%) of all compressions were classified as manually correct (defined as sternal compression depth >5 cm). In contrast, the LUCAS device showed a constant and reliable CPR performance (99.96% correctly applied chest compressions correctly applied within the device programmed parameters, P = 0.0162) with almost no variance between the different sequences.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The LUCAS CPR device represents a reliable alternative to manual CPR in a moving ambulance vehicle during emergency evacuation. Furthermore, it needs less human resources and is safer for the EMS personnel.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87385,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acute cardiac care\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"1-6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3109/17482941.2012.735675\",\"citationCount\":\"64\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acute cardiac care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3109/17482941.2012.735675\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acute cardiac care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/17482941.2012.735675","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 64

摘要

背景:新型机械胸部按压装置为正在进行心肺复苏术的心脏骤停患者提供了转运的可能性,并可能显著缩短复苏后护理的时间延迟。方法:我们使用心肺复苏术训练模型模拟救护车运输过程中8分钟的心脏复苏情况。我们比较了由两名经验丰富的复苏员组成的团队与机械胸外按压装置(LUCAS)的表现。结果:两名经验丰富的复苏员的心肺复苏表现出矛盾的结果。虽然平均压缩率在推荐范围内(103/min, 95% CI: 93-113/min),但平均压缩深度远低于实际推荐的>5 cm的压缩深度(49.7 mm, 95% CI: 46.1-53.3mm)。然而,只有平均三分之二(67%)的按压被归类为手动矫正(定义为胸骨按压深度> 5cm)。相比之下,LUCAS装置显示出稳定可靠的心肺复苏术表现(99.96%正确应用胸腔按压,正确应用设备编程参数,P = 0.0162),不同序列之间几乎没有差异。结论:LUCAS心肺复苏术装置是一种可靠的替代人工心肺复苏术在移动的救护车车辆在紧急疏散。此外,它需要较少的人力资源,对EMS人员来说更安全。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mechanical versus manual chest compression CPR under ground ambulance transport conditions.

Background: Novel mechanical chest compression devices offer the possibility to transport cardiac arrest patients with ongoing CPR and might shorten significantly the time delay to post-resuscitation care.

Methods: We simulated an eight-minute cardiac resuscitation situation during ambulance transport using CPR training manikins. We compared teams consisting of two experienced resuscitators with the performance of a mechanical chest compression device (LUCAS).

Results: CPR-performance by two experienced resuscitators demonstrated ambivalent results. Whereas mean compression rate was within the recommended range (103/min, 95% CI: 93-113/min), mean compression depth was closely below the actually recommended compression depth of >5 cm (49.7 mm, 95% CI: 46.1-53.3mm). Nevertheless, only a mean of two thirds (67%) of all compressions were classified as manually correct (defined as sternal compression depth >5 cm). In contrast, the LUCAS device showed a constant and reliable CPR performance (99.96% correctly applied chest compressions correctly applied within the device programmed parameters, P = 0.0162) with almost no variance between the different sequences.

Conclusion: The LUCAS CPR device represents a reliable alternative to manual CPR in a moving ambulance vehicle during emergency evacuation. Furthermore, it needs less human resources and is safer for the EMS personnel.

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:481959085
Book学术官方微信