...
首页> 外文期刊>BMJ: British medical journal >Should we take patients in cardiac arrest to hospital?
【24h】

Should we take patients in cardiac arrest to hospital?

机译:我们应该把病人心脏骤停吗医院吗?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

YES Out of hospital cardiac arrest is a leading cause of premature death, and overall long term survival is about 10% Two schools of thought towards cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) have emerged in the past decade: the "glass 90% empty" sceptics, who see one arresting patient after another "come in dead and stay dead," versus the "glass 10% full" optimists, who look to return more survivors to productive life. Clinical decision rules derived over the past decade clarify when further resuscitation and transport to the hospital is futile and offer the potential to reduce ambulance transport and its inherent costs and risks. The best studied is the Basic Life Support Termination of Resuscitation (BLS-TOR) rule, which directs paramedics to stop CPR and not to transport the patient if they have not witnessed the cardiac arrest, no shock has been given (no shockable rhythm), and spontaneous circulation has not returned.
机译:是的医院心脏骤停是主要的导致过早死亡的,长期和整体生存是两个思想流派约10%对心肺复苏术(CPR)在过去的十年中出现:“玻璃90%空”怀疑论者,他看到一个醒目的病人另一个“死亡,待死,”与“玻璃10%”乐观主义者,他期待回报更多的幸存者富有成效的生活。决策规则在过去的十年进一步阐明当复苏和运输去医院是徒劳的,而且提供了可能减少救护车运输和其固有的成本和风险。生命支持终止复苏(BLS-TOR)规则,指导护理人员停止心肺复苏,而不是运输病人如果他们有不是见证了心脏骤停,没有冲击(没有shockable节奏),和自发的发行量不会返回。

著录项

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