心肺复苏实时视听反馈设备能改善患者的预后吗?系统综述和荟萃分析。

IF 1.9 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Nitish Sood, Anish Sangari, Arnav Goyal, Christina Sun, Madison Horinek, Joseph Andy Hauger, Lane Perry
{"title":"心肺复苏实时视听反馈设备能改善患者的预后吗?系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Nitish Sood,&nbsp;Anish Sangari,&nbsp;Arnav Goyal,&nbsp;Christina Sun,&nbsp;Madison Horinek,&nbsp;Joseph Andy Hauger,&nbsp;Lane Perry","doi":"10.4330/wjc.v15.i10.531","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cardiac arrest is a leading cause of mortality in America and has increased in the incidence of cases over the last several years. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) increases survival outcomes in cases of cardiac arrest; however, healthcare workers often do not perform CPR within recommended guidelines. Real-time audiovisual feedback (RTAVF) devices improve the quality of CPR performed. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the effect of RTAVF-assisted CPR with conventional CPR and to evaluate whether the use of these devices improved outcomes in both in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify the effect of RTAVF-assisted CPR on patient outcomes and CPR quality with in- and OHCA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE from inception to July 27, 2020, for studies comparing patient outcomes and/or CPR quality metrics between RTAVF-assisted CPR and conventional CPR in cases of IHCA or OHCA. The primary outcomes of interest were return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to hospital discharge (SHD), with secondary outcomes of chest compression rate and chest compression depth. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and Cochrane Collaboration's \"risk of bias\" tool. Data was analyzed using R statistical software 4.2.0. results were statistically significant if <i>P</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen studies (<i>n</i> = 17600) were included. Patients were on average 69 ± 17.5 years old, with 7022 (39.8%) female patients. Overall pooled ROSC in patients in this study was 37% (95% confidence interval = 23%-54%). RTAVF-assisted CPR significantly improved ROSC, both overall [risk ratio (RR) 1.17 (1.001-1.362); <i>P</i> = 0.048] and in cases of IHCA [RR 1.36 (1.06-1.80); <i>P</i> = 0.002]. There was no significant improvement in ROSC for OHCA (RR 1.04; 0.91-1.19; <i>P</i> = 0.47). No significant effect was seen in SHD [RR 1.04 (0.91-1.19); <i>P</i> = 0.47] or chest compression rate [standardized mean difference (SMD) -2.1; (-4.6-0.5)]; <i>P</i> = 0.09]. A significant improvement was seen in chest compression depth [SMD 1.6; (0.02-3.1); <i>P</i> = 0.047].</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RTAVF-assisted CPR increases ROSC in cases of IHCA and chest compression depth but has no significant effect on ROSC in cases of OHCA, SHD, or chest compression rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":23800,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Cardiology","volume":"15 10","pages":"531-541"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10600786/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do cardiopulmonary resuscitation real-time audiovisual feedback devices improve patient outcomes? A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Nitish Sood,&nbsp;Anish Sangari,&nbsp;Arnav Goyal,&nbsp;Christina Sun,&nbsp;Madison Horinek,&nbsp;Joseph Andy Hauger,&nbsp;Lane Perry\",\"doi\":\"10.4330/wjc.v15.i10.531\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cardiac arrest is a leading cause of mortality in America and has increased in the incidence of cases over the last several years. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) increases survival outcomes in cases of cardiac arrest; however, healthcare workers often do not perform CPR within recommended guidelines. Real-time audiovisual feedback (RTAVF) devices improve the quality of CPR performed. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the effect of RTAVF-assisted CPR with conventional CPR and to evaluate whether the use of these devices improved outcomes in both in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify the effect of RTAVF-assisted CPR on patient outcomes and CPR quality with in- and OHCA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE from inception to July 27, 2020, for studies comparing patient outcomes and/or CPR quality metrics between RTAVF-assisted CPR and conventional CPR in cases of IHCA or OHCA. The primary outcomes of interest were return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to hospital discharge (SHD), with secondary outcomes of chest compression rate and chest compression depth. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and Cochrane Collaboration's \\\"risk of bias\\\" tool. Data was analyzed using R statistical software 4.2.0. results were statistically significant if <i>P</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen studies (<i>n</i> = 17600) were included. Patients were on average 69 ± 17.5 years old, with 7022 (39.8%) female patients. Overall pooled ROSC in patients in this study was 37% (95% confidence interval = 23%-54%). RTAVF-assisted CPR significantly improved ROSC, both overall [risk ratio (RR) 1.17 (1.001-1.362); <i>P</i> = 0.048] and in cases of IHCA [RR 1.36 (1.06-1.80); <i>P</i> = 0.002]. There was no significant improvement in ROSC for OHCA (RR 1.04; 0.91-1.19; <i>P</i> = 0.47). No significant effect was seen in SHD [RR 1.04 (0.91-1.19); <i>P</i> = 0.47] or chest compression rate [standardized mean difference (SMD) -2.1; (-4.6-0.5)]; <i>P</i> = 0.09]. A significant improvement was seen in chest compression depth [SMD 1.6; (0.02-3.1); <i>P</i> = 0.047].</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RTAVF-assisted CPR increases ROSC in cases of IHCA and chest compression depth but has no significant effect on ROSC in cases of OHCA, SHD, or chest compression rate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Cardiology\",\"volume\":\"15 10\",\"pages\":\"531-541\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10600786/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4330/wjc.v15.i10.531\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4330/wjc.v15.i10.531","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:心脏骤停是美国死亡的主要原因,在过去几年中病例的发生率有所上升。心肺复苏术可提高心脏骤停患者的生存率;然而,医护人员通常不在推荐的指南范围内进行心肺复苏术。实时视听反馈(RTAVF)设备提高了执行CPR的质量。这项系统综述和荟萃分析旨在比较RTAVF辅助心肺复苏术与传统心肺复苏法的效果,并评估这些设备的使用是否改善了院内心脏骤停(IHCA)和院外心脏骤停(OHCA)患者的预后。目的:确定RTAVF辅助心肺复苏术对IHCA和OHCA患者结局和心肺复苏质量的影响。感兴趣的主要结果是自发循环的恢复(ROSC)和出院存活率(SHD),次要结果是胸部压迫率和胸部压迫深度。纳入研究的方法学质量使用Newcastle Ottawa量表和Cochrane Collaboration的“偏倚风险”工具进行评估。使用R统计软件4.2.0对数据进行分析。结果:纳入13项研究(n=17600)。患者平均年龄69±17.5岁,其中7022名(39.8%)女性患者。本研究中患者的总ROSC为37%(95%置信区间=23%-54%)。RTAVF辅助CPR显著改善ROSC,总体[风险比(RR)1.17(1.001-1.362);P=0.048]和IHCA病例[RR 1.36(1.06-1.80);P=0.002]。OHCA的ROSC没有显著改善(RR 1.04;0.91-1.19;P=0.47)。SHD[RR 1.04(0.91-1.19);P=0.47]或胸部压缩率[标准化平均差(SMD)-2.1;(-4.6-0.5)]没有显著影响;P=0.09]。胸部按压深度有显著改善[SMD 1.6;(0.02-3.1);P=0.047]。结论:RTAVF辅助CPR在IHCA和胸部按压深度的情况下增加ROSC,但在OHCA、SHD或胸部按压率的情况下对ROSC没有显著影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Do cardiopulmonary resuscitation real-time audiovisual feedback devices improve patient outcomes? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Do cardiopulmonary resuscitation real-time audiovisual feedback devices improve patient outcomes? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Do cardiopulmonary resuscitation real-time audiovisual feedback devices improve patient outcomes? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Do cardiopulmonary resuscitation real-time audiovisual feedback devices improve patient outcomes? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Cardiac arrest is a leading cause of mortality in America and has increased in the incidence of cases over the last several years. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) increases survival outcomes in cases of cardiac arrest; however, healthcare workers often do not perform CPR within recommended guidelines. Real-time audiovisual feedback (RTAVF) devices improve the quality of CPR performed. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the effect of RTAVF-assisted CPR with conventional CPR and to evaluate whether the use of these devices improved outcomes in both in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients.

Aim: To identify the effect of RTAVF-assisted CPR on patient outcomes and CPR quality with in- and OHCA.

Methods: We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE from inception to July 27, 2020, for studies comparing patient outcomes and/or CPR quality metrics between RTAVF-assisted CPR and conventional CPR in cases of IHCA or OHCA. The primary outcomes of interest were return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to hospital discharge (SHD), with secondary outcomes of chest compression rate and chest compression depth. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and Cochrane Collaboration's "risk of bias" tool. Data was analyzed using R statistical software 4.2.0. results were statistically significant if P < 0.05.

Results: Thirteen studies (n = 17600) were included. Patients were on average 69 ± 17.5 years old, with 7022 (39.8%) female patients. Overall pooled ROSC in patients in this study was 37% (95% confidence interval = 23%-54%). RTAVF-assisted CPR significantly improved ROSC, both overall [risk ratio (RR) 1.17 (1.001-1.362); P = 0.048] and in cases of IHCA [RR 1.36 (1.06-1.80); P = 0.002]. There was no significant improvement in ROSC for OHCA (RR 1.04; 0.91-1.19; P = 0.47). No significant effect was seen in SHD [RR 1.04 (0.91-1.19); P = 0.47] or chest compression rate [standardized mean difference (SMD) -2.1; (-4.6-0.5)]; P = 0.09]. A significant improvement was seen in chest compression depth [SMD 1.6; (0.02-3.1); P = 0.047].

Conclusion: RTAVF-assisted CPR increases ROSC in cases of IHCA and chest compression depth but has no significant effect on ROSC in cases of OHCA, SHD, or chest compression rate.

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
World Journal of Cardiology
World Journal of Cardiology CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
54
×
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