Kramer-Johansen Jo, Myklebust Helge, Wik Lars, Fellows Bob, Svensson Leif, Sørebø Hallstein, Steen Petter Andreas
Institute for Experimental Medical Research, University of Oslo, N-0407 Oslo, Norway.
Resuscitation. 2006 Dec;71(3):283-92. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2006.05.011. Epub 2006 Oct 27.
To compare quality of CPR during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with and without automated feedback.
Consecutive adult, out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of all causes were studied. One hundred and seventy-six episodes (March 2002-October 2003) without feedback were compared to 108 episodes (October 2003-September 2004) where automatic feedback on CPR was given. Automated verbal and visual feedback was based on measured quality with a prototype defibrillator. Quality of CPR was the main outcome measure and survival was reported as specified in the protocol.
Average compression depth increased from (mean +/- S.D.) 34 +/- 9 to 38 +/- 6 mm (mean difference (95% CI) 4 (2, 6), P < 0.001), and median percentage of compressions with adequate depth (38-51 mm) increased from 24% to 53% (P < 0.001, Mann-Whitney U-test) with feedback. Mean compression rate decreased from 121 +/- 18 to 109 +/- 12 min(-1) (difference -12 (-16, -9), P = 0.001). There were no changes in the mean number of ventilations per minute; 11 +/- 5 min(-1) versus 11 +/- 4 min(-1) (difference 0 (-1, 1), P = 0.8) or the fraction of time without chest compressions; 0.48 +/- 0.18 versus 0.45 +/- 0.17 (difference -0.03 (-0.08, 0.01), P = 0.08). With intention to treat analysis 7/241 control patients were discharged alive (2.9%) versus 5/117 with feedback (4.3%) (OR 1.5 (95% CI; 0.8, 3), P = 0.2). In a logistic regression analysis of all cases, witnessed arrest (OR 4.2 (95% CI; 1.6, 11), P = 0.004) and average compression depth (per mm increase) (OR 1.05 (95% CI; 1.01, 1.09), P = 0.02) were associated with rate of hospital admission.
Automatic feedback improved CPR quality in this prospective non-randomised study of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Increased compression depth was associated with increased short-term survival.
ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00138996), http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/.
比较院外心脏骤停期间有自动反馈和无自动反馈时的心肺复苏质量。
对所有原因导致的连续成年院外心脏骤停病例进行研究。将176例(2002年3月至2003年10月)无反馈的病例与108例(2003年10月至2004年9月)给予心肺复苏自动反馈的病例进行比较。自动语音和视觉反馈基于使用原型除颤器测量的质量。心肺复苏质量是主要结局指标,生存情况按照方案规定进行报告。
平均按压深度从(均值±标准差)34±9毫米增加到38±6毫米(平均差值(95%可信区间)4(2,6),P<0.001),且按压深度足够(38 - 51毫米)的中位数百分比从24%增加到53%(P<0.001,曼-惠特尼U检验)。平均按压速率从121±18次/分钟降至109±12次/分钟(差值 - 12(- 16,- 9),P = 0.001)。每分钟平均通气次数无变化;分别为11±5次/分钟和11±4次/分钟(差值0(- 1,1),P = 0.8),以及无胸外按压时间的比例也无变化;分别为0.48±0.18和0.45±0.17(差值 - 0.03(- 0.08,0.01),P = 0.08)。意向性分析显示,241例对照组患者中有7例存活出院(2.9%),而有反馈组117例中有5例存活出院(4.3%)(比值比1.5(95%可信区间;0.8,3),P = 0.2)。在对所有病例的逻辑回归分析中,目击心脏骤停(比值比4.2(95%可信区间;1.6,11),P = 0.004)和平均按压深度(每增加1毫米)(比值比1.05(95%可信区间;1.01,1.09),P = 0.02)与入院率相关。
在这项院外心脏骤停的前瞻性非随机研究中,自动反馈改善了心肺复苏质量。按压深度增加与短期生存率提高相关。
ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT00138996),http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/