Wang Hui-Chih, Chiang Wen-Chu, Chen Shey-Ying, Ke Yi-Ling, Chi Chun-Lin, Yang Chih-Wei, Lin Pei-Ching, Ko Patrick Chow-In, Wang Yao-Cheng, Tsai Tsung-Che, Huang Chien-Hwa, Hsiung Kuan-Hwa, Ma Matthew Huei-Ming, Chen Shyr-Chyr, Chen Wen-Jone, Lin Fang-Yue
Department of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Resuscitation. 2007 Sep;74(3):453-60. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2007.01.018. Epub 2007 Mar 26.
The quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) plays a crucial role in saving lives from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Previous studies have identified sub-optimal CPR quality in the prehospital settings, but the causes leading to such deficiencies were not fully elucidated.
This prospective study was conducted to identify operator- and ambulance-related factors affecting CPR quality during ambulance transport; and to assess the effectiveness of mechanical CPR device in such environment.
A digital video-recording system was set up in two ambulances in Taipei City to study CPR practice for adult, non-traumatic OHCAs from January 2005 to March 2006. Enrolled patients received either manual CPR or CPR by a mechanical device (Thumper). Quality of CPR in terms of (1) adequacy of chest compressions, (2) instantaneous compression rates, and (3) unnecessary no-chest compression interval, was assessed by time-motion analysis of the videos.
A total of 20 ambulance resuscitations were included. Compared to the manual group (n=12), the Thumper group (n=8) had similar no-chest compression interval (33.40% versus 31.63%, P=0.16); significantly lower average chest compression rate (113.3+/-47.1 min(-1) versus 52.3+/-14.2 min(-1), P<0.05), average chest compression rate excluding no-chest compression interval (164.2+/-43.3 min(-1) versus 77.2+/-6.9 min(-1), P<0.05), average ventilation rate (16.1+/-4.9 min(-1) versus 11.7+/-3.5 min(-1), P<0.05); and longer no-chest compression interval before getting off the ambulance (5.7+/-9.9s versus 18.7+/-9.1s, P<0.05). The majority of the no-chest compression interval was considered operator-related; only 15.3% was caused by ambulance related factors.
Many unnecessary no-chest compression intervals were identified during ambulance CPR, and most of this was operator, rather than ambulance related. Though a mechanical device could minimise the no-chest compression intervals after activation, it took considerable time to deploy in a system with short transport time. Human factors remained the most important cause of poor CPR quality. Ways to improve the CPR quality in the ambulance warrant further study.
心肺复苏(CPR)的质量在挽救院外心脏骤停(OHCA)患者生命中起着关键作用。以往研究已发现院前环境中心肺复苏质量未达最佳,但导致此类不足的原因尚未完全阐明。
本前瞻性研究旨在确定在救护车转运期间影响心肺复苏质量的操作员和救护车相关因素;并评估在这种环境下机械心肺复苏设备的有效性。
在台北市的两辆救护车上设置了数字视频记录系统,以研究2005年1月至2006年3月期间成人非创伤性院外心脏骤停的心肺复苏实践。纳入的患者接受手动心肺复苏或通过机械装置(Thumper)进行心肺复苏。通过对视频的时间动作分析,评估心肺复苏在以下方面的质量:(1)胸外按压的充分性,(2)即时按压速率,以及(3)不必要的无胸外按压间隔。
共纳入20例救护车复苏病例。与手动组(n = 12)相比,Thumper组(n = 8)的无胸外按压间隔相似(33.40%对31.63%,P = 0.16);平均胸外按压速率显著更低(113.3±47.1次/分钟对52.3±14.2次/分钟,P < 0.(此处原文有误,推测是P < 0.05)),排除无胸外按压间隔后的平均胸外按压速率(164.2±43.3次/分钟对77.2±6.9次/分钟,P < 0.05),平均通气速率(16.1±4.9次/分钟对11.7±3.5次/分钟,P < 0.05);以及下车前无胸外按压间隔更长(5.(此处原文有误,推测是5.7)±9.9秒对18.7±9.1秒,P < 0.05)。大多数无胸外按压间隔被认为与操作员相关;只有15.3%是由救护车相关因素引起的。
在救护车心肺复苏期间发现了许多不必要的无胸外按压间隔,且大多数与操作员而非救护车相关。尽管机械装置在启动后可将无胸外按压间隔减至最小,但在转运时间短的系统中部署需要相当长的时间。人为因素仍然是心肺复苏质量差最重要的原因。改善救护车中心肺复苏质量的方法值得进一步研究。