首页> 外文期刊>Hong Kong journal of emergency medicine. >The potential of leg-foot chest compression as an alternative to conventional hands-on compression during cardiopulmonary resuscitation
【24h】

The potential of leg-foot chest compression as an alternative to conventional hands-on compression during cardiopulmonary resuscitation

机译:在心肺复苏过程中,腿脚胸部按压有可能替代传统的手动按压

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Background: Conventional hands-on chest compression, in cardiopulmonary resuscitation, is often inadequate, especially when the rescuers are weak or have a small physique. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the potential of leg-foot chest compression, with and without a footstool, during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Methods and Results: We prospectively enrolled 21 medical workers competent in basic life support. They performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation on a manikin for 2?min using conventional hands-on compression (HO), leg-foot compression (LF), and leg-foot compression with a footstool (LF?+?FS). We analyzed the compression depths, changes in the rescuers’ vital signs, and the modified Borg scale scores after the trials. The compression depth did not differ between the cases using HO and LF. In the case of LF?+?FS, compression depths ?5?cm were more frequently observed (median, inter-quartile range: 93%, 81%–100%) than in HO (9%, 0%–57%, p??0.01) and LF (28%, 11%–47%, p??0.01). The increase in the heart rate or modified Borg scale scores, after the trials, did not differ between the HO and LF group; however, the values were the lowest in the case of LF?+?FS (49?±?18 beats/min and 5 (4–7) in HO, 46?±?18 and 6 (5–7) in LF, and 32?±?11 and 2 (1–3) in LF?+?FS, respectively, p??0.01). However, the increase in blood pressure, SpOsub2/sub, and respiratory rate were not different among each group. The increases in the heart rate and modified Borg scale scores negatively were correlated with the rescuers’ body size, in the case of HO and LF, but not LF?+?FS. Conclusion: LF can be used as an alternative to HO, when adequate HO is difficult. LF?+?FS could be used when rescuers are weak or have a small physique and when the victims are bigger than the rescuers.
机译:背景:在心肺复苏中,常规的动手胸部按压常常不足,尤其是在急救人员虚弱或体格较小的情况下。目的:本研究旨在探讨心肺复苏过程中有脚凳和无脚凳时腿脚胸部受压的可能性。方法和结果:我们前瞻性招募了21名具备基本生命支持能力的医务工作者。他们使用人体模型对人体进行了心肺复苏术,持续时间为2分钟,使用的是常规的手压(HO),腿脚压缩(LF)和脚凳压力(LF ++ FS)。在试验后,我们分析了压迫深度,救援人员生命体征的变化以及修正的Borg量表得分。在使用HO和LF的情况下,压缩深度没有差异。在LF?+?FS的情况下,观察到的压缩深度为?5?cm(中位数,四分位间距:93%,81%–100%),比HO(9%,0%–57%, p 0.01)和低频(28%,11%–47%,p 0.01)。试验后,HO组和LF组的心率增加或Borg量表评分修改无差异。但是,在LF?+?FS(49?±?18次/ min,HO值为5(4-7),LF?46?±?18和6(5-7))的情况下,该值最低。在LF ++ FS中分别为32?±?11和2(1-3),p?<?0.01)。但是,各组的血压升高,SpO 2 和呼吸频率无差异。在HO和LF的情况下,心率的增加和修正的Borg量表评分与救助者的体型负相关,而在LF ++ FS方面则不然。结论:当难以获得足够的HO时,LF可以替代HO。当救助者身体虚弱或体格较小并且受害人大于救助者时,可以使用LF + FS。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号