Suppr超能文献

与非专业急救响应计划相关的不良事件:公众可获取除颤试验经验

Adverse events associated with lay emergency response programs: the public access defibrillation trial experience.

作者信息

Peberdy Mary Ann, Ottingham Lois Van, Groh William J, Hedges Jerris, Terndrup Thomas E, Pirrallo Ronald G, Mann N Clay, Sehra Ruchir

机构信息

Virginia Commonwealth University Health System, Box 908204, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.

出版信息

Resuscitation. 2006 Jul;70(1):59-65. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2005.10.030.

Abstract

UNLABELLED

The adverse event (AE) profile of lay volunteer CPR and public access defibrillation (PAD) programs is unknown. We undertook to investigate the frequency, severity, and type of AE's occurring in widespread PAD implementation.

DESIGN

A randomized-controlled clinical trial.

SETTING

One thousand two hundred and sixty public and residential facilities in the US and Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

On-site, volunteer, lay personnel trained in CPR only compared to CPR plus automated external defibrillators (AEDs).

INTERVENTION

Persons experiencing possible cardiac arrest receiving lay volunteer first response with CPR+AED compared with CPR alone.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

An AE is defined as an event of significance that caused, or had the potential to cause, harm to a patient or volunteer, or a criminal act. AE data were collected prospectively.

RESULTS

Twenty thousand three hundred and ninety six lay volunteers were trained in either CPR or CPR+AED. One thousand seven hundred and sixteen AEDs were placed in units randomized to the AED arm. There were 26,389 exposure months. Only 36 AE's were reported. There were two patient-related AEs: both patients experienced rib fractures. There were seven volunteer-related AE's: one had a muscle pull, four experienced significant emotional distress and two reported pressure by their employee to participate. There were 27 AED-related AEs: 17 episodes of theft involving 20 devices, three involved AEDs that were placed in locations inaccessible to the volunteer, four AEDs had mechanical problems not affecting patient safety, and three devices were improperly maintained by the facility. There were no inappropriate shocks and no failures to shock when indicated (95% upper bound for probability of inappropriate shock or failure to shock = 0.0012).

CONCLUSIONS

AED use following widespread training of lay-persons in CPR and AED is generally safe for the volunteer and the patient. Lay volunteers may report significant, usually transient, emotional stress following response to a potential cardiac arrest. Within the context of this prospective, randomized multi-center study, AEDs have an exceptionally high safety profile when used by trained lay responders.

摘要

未标注

非专业志愿者实施心肺复苏术(CPR)及公众可获取除颤(PAD)项目的不良事件(AE)情况尚不清楚。我们开展此项研究以调查广泛实施PAD过程中AE的发生频率、严重程度及类型。

设计

随机对照临床试验。

地点

美国和加拿大的1260个公共及住宅设施场所。

参与者

仅接受CPR培训的现场非专业志愿者与接受CPR加自动体外除颤器(AED)培训的人员进行对比。

干预措施

与仅接受CPR相比,心脏骤停疑似患者接受非专业志愿者CPR加AED的首次急救。

主要观察指标

AE定义为对患者或志愿者造成或有可能造成伤害的重大事件,或犯罪行为。前瞻性收集AE数据。

结果

20396名非专业志愿者接受了CPR或CPR加AED培训。1716台AED被放置在随机分配至AED组的场所。共有26389个暴露月。仅报告了36起AE。有两起与患者相关的AE:两名患者均发生肋骨骨折。有7起与志愿者相关的AE:1例肌肉拉伤,4例出现明显情绪困扰,2例报告受到雇主压力而参与。有27起与AED相关的AE:17起盗窃事件涉及20台设备,3起涉及志愿者无法触及位置的AED,4台AED存在不影响患者安全的机械问题,3台设备由场所维护不当。未发生不适当电击事件,也未出现应电击时未电击的情况(不适当电击或未电击概率的95%上限 = 0.0012)。

结论

在对非专业人员广泛进行CPR和AED培训后使用AED,对志愿者和患者总体安全。非专业志愿者在对疑似心脏骤停做出反应后可能会报告明显的、通常为短暂的情绪应激。在此项前瞻性、随机多中心研究中,经培训的非专业急救人员使用AED时安全性极高。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验