...
首页> 外文期刊>Resuscitation. >A randomised control trial comparing two techniques for locating chest compression hand position in adult Basic Life Support.
【24h】

A randomised control trial comparing two techniques for locating chest compression hand position in adult Basic Life Support.

机译:一项随机对照试验,比较了两种在成人基本生活支持中定位胸部按压手位置的技术。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

INTRODUCTION: Chest compressions performed correctly have the potential to increase survival post cardiac arrest. The 2005 European Resuscitation Council (ERC) guidelines altered and simplified instructions for hand position placement to increase the number of chest compressions performed. This randomised controlled trial compares chest compression efficacy (hand position and number of effective chest compressions) after training using the 2005 guidelines or the 2005 guidelines with a hand position modification based on 2000 ERC guidelines. METHODS: First year healthcare students at the University of Birmingham, United Kingdom, were randomly allocated to either '2005' or 'intervention' group immediately after passing a Basic Life Support (BLS) assessment to ERC standards. The 2005 group performed 2 min of BLS on a SkillReporter manikin (Laerdal Medical, Stavanger, Norway). The intervention group received training on hand placement using landmark techniques from the 2000 ERC guidelines; emphasising rapid hand positioning. This group also performed 2 min of BLS on a SkillReporter manikin. RESULTS: 82 students were assessed; 41 in the 2005 group and 41 in the intervention group. Average compression rate was 102 in the 2005 group and 104 in the intervention group (p=0.29). Average number of incorrect hand placements was 24 in the 2005 group and 9 in the intervention group (p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The use of landmark measurement techniques in hand placement for external chest compressions does not have a detrimental effect on the number of chest compressions performed during BLS and increases correct hand positioning.
机译:简介:正确地进行胸部按压有可能增加心脏骤停后的存活率。 2005年欧洲复苏委员会(ERC)指南对手的位置进行了更改和简化,以增加胸部按压的次数。这项随机对照试验比较了使用2005年指南或2005年指南进行训练后的胸部按压效果(手部位置和有效胸部按压次数),并根据2000 ERC指南修改了手部位置。方法:英国伯明翰大学的一年级医疗专业学生在通过基本生命支持(BLS)评估达到ERC标准后,立即被随机分配到“ 2005”或“干预”组。 2005年小组在SkillReporter人体模型(挪威斯塔万格的Laerdal Medical)上进行了2分钟的BLS检查。干预小组接受了2000 ERC指南中使用划时代技术进行的手部放置培训;强调快速的手定位。该小组还对SkillReporter人体模型执行了2分钟的BLS。结果:82名学生得到了评估; 2005年小组中为41名,干预小组中为41名。 2005年组的平均压缩率是102,干预组是104(p = 0.29)。 2005年组中平均不正确的手部放置次数为24,干预组中为9(p = 0.03)。结论:在外部胸部按压的手部放置中使用界标测量技术不会对BLS期间进行的胸部按压次数产生有害影响,并且会增加正确的手部位置。

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