非专业人员进行口对口、口对面罩和口对面罩通气的比较。

Comparison of mouth-to-mouth, mouth-to-mask and mouth-to-face-shield ventilation by lay persons.

作者信息

Paal Peter, Falk Markus, Sumann Günther, Demetz Florian, Beikircher Werner, Gruber Elisabeth, Ellerton John, Brugger Hermann

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, South Tyrolean Alpine Association, International Commission for Mountain Emergency Medicine ICAR MEDCOM, Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria.

出版信息

Resuscitation. 2006 Jul;70(1):117-23. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2005.03.024. Epub 2006 Jun 9.

DOI:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2005.03.024

PMID:16764983

Abstract

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS

A prospective randomised study on 70 volunteers without previous first aid education (42 males, 28 females, mean age 17) was performed to compare mouth-to-mouth ventilation (MMV, n = 24) versus mouth-to-pocket-mask ventilation (MPV, n = 25) and mouth-to-face-shield ventilation (MFV, n =21), and to evaluate if an instruction period of 10 min would be sufficient to teach lay persons artificial ventilation. Every volunteer performed three ventilation series using a bench model of an unprotected airway.

RESULTS

MMV and MPV show higher mean tidal volume (TV) than MFV (values of series 3: 976 +/- 454 and 868 +/- 459 versus 604 +/- 328 ml, P = 0.002 and P = 0.025, respectively). We found a higher inter-individual variation in TV than in previous studies (P = 0.031). The recommended TV of 700-1000 ml was reached in only 23%, most frequently with MPV (MMV 16.7%, MPV 32%, MFV 19%) but the difference was not significant (P = 0.391). However, we found a significantly higher percentage with a TV below 700 ml with MFV (MMV 33.3%, MPV 36%, MFV 66.7% P = 0.047) and a significantly higher percentage of TV exceeding 1000 ml with MMV (MMV 50%, MPV 32%, MFV 14.3%) (P = 0.039). "Stomach" inflation was highest with MMV (79.2%) followed by MPV (52%) and MFV (42.9%) (P = 0.034). We found further differences between the sexes; males produced a higher TV (P = 0.003) and a higher percentage of stomach inflation (P = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

MPV showed the best ventilation quality. It resulted in a more adequate TV than MMV and MFV and lower stomach inflation than MMV. Only a relatively low percentage of ventilations were within the recommended range for TV and this may be related to the short training duration. We found different performances between the sexes, a high inter-individual variation and mainly a low ventilation quality. Therefore, further studies have to focus more on teaching duration, sex differences and ventilation quality.

摘要

目的与方法

对70名未曾接受过急救培训的志愿者（42名男性，28名女性，平均年龄17岁）进行了一项前瞻性随机研究，以比较口对口通气（MMV，n = 24）、口对便携面罩通气（MPV，n = 25）和口对面罩通气（MFV，n = 21），并评估10分钟的指导时间是否足以教会非专业人员进行人工通气。每位志愿者使用无保护气道的人体模型进行三组通气操作。

结果

MMV和MPV的平均潮气量（TV）高于MFV（第3组数值：976±454和868±459 vs 604±328 ml，P分别为0.002和0.025）。我们发现TV的个体间差异比先前研究更大（P = 0.031）。仅23%的通气量达到了700 - 1000 ml的推荐值，最常出现在MPV组（MMV为16.7%，MPV为32%，MFV为19%），但差异不显著（P = 0.391）。然而，我们发现MFV组TV低于700 ml的比例显著更高（MMV为33.3%，MPV为36%，MFV为66.7%，P = 0.047），MMV组TV超过1000 ml的比例显著更高（MMV为50%，MPV为32%，MFV为14.3%）（P = 0.039）。MMV组的“胃”充气情况最严重（79.2%），其次是MPV组（52%）和MFV组（42.9%）（P = 0.034）。我们还发现了性别差异；男性产生的TV更高（P = 0.003），胃充气的比例更高（P = 0.029）。