Meursing Bart T J, Wulterkens Dennie W, van Kesteren Robert G
Department of Cardiology, Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital, Postbox 9015, 6500 GS Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Resuscitation. 2005 Mar;64(3):279-86. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2004.10.016.
In 1982 the Netherlands made a unilateral decision to change the established airway-breathing-circulation (ABC) training sequence to a different approach that stressed efficiency in diagnosis and treatment. This Dutch approach became known as the CAB (circulation-airway-breathing) sequence. Twenty years later, being confronted with the new international guidelines (published 2000) that still use the ABC approach, the Netherlands Resuscitation Council (NRR) questioned again the validity of our persistence in using the "Dutch variant" of resuscitation. This resulted in revised national guidelines that conform again with the international guidelines. This article restates the main rationale and arguments behind the original decision to change to a Dutch (CAB) version of resuscitation over 20 years ago. The national decision to adopt the ABC approach once again was mainly to prevent resuscitation in the Netherlands from being isolated from the rest of the world and was not based on present knowledge of physiology and resuscitation. The authors hope that this article will open the discussion once again.
1982年，荷兰单方面决定将既定的气道-呼吸-循环（ABC）训练顺序改为另一种强调诊断和治疗效率的方法。这种荷兰式方法被称为CAB（循环-气道-呼吸）顺序。二十年后，面对仍采用ABC方法的新国际指南（2000年发布），荷兰复苏委员会（NRR）再次质疑我们坚持使用“荷兰式复苏变体”的合理性。这导致了修订后的国家指南再次与国际指南保持一致。本文重申了二十多年前改为荷兰式（CAB）复苏最初决定背后的主要基本原理和论据。荷兰再次采用ABC方法的国家决定主要是为了防止荷兰的复苏与世界其他地区脱节，而并非基于目前的生理学和复苏知识。作者希望本文能再次开启相关讨论。
