Rechner J A, Loach V J, Ali M T, Barber V S, Young J D, Mason D G
Intensive Care Society Trials Group, Nuffield Department of Anaesthetics, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Headley Way, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK.
Anaesthesia. 2007 Aug;62(8):790-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2007.05140.x.
The laryngeal mask airway is included as a first line airway device during adult resuscitation by first responders. However, there is little evidence for its role in paediatric resuscitation. Using anaesthetised children as a model for paediatric cardiopulmonary arrest, we compared the ability of critical care nurses to manually ventilate the anaesthetised child via the laryngeal mask airway compared with the facemask and oropharyngeal airway. The airway devices were inserted in random order and chest expansion was measured using an ultrasound distance transducer. The critical care nurses were able to place the laryngeal mask airway and achieve successful ventilation in 82% of children compared to 70% using the facemask and oropharyngeal airway, although the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.136). The median time to first successful breath using the laryngeal mask airway was 39 s compared to 25 s using the facemask (p < 0.001). In this group of nurses, we did not show a difference in ventilation via a laryngeal mask airway or facemask, although facemask ventilation was achieved more quickly.
喉罩气道被急救人员列为成人复苏时的一线气道装置。然而,几乎没有证据表明其在儿科复苏中的作用。我们以麻醉儿童作为小儿心肺骤停的模型,比较了重症护理护士通过喉罩气道与面罩及口咽气道对麻醉儿童进行手动通气的能力。气道装置以随机顺序插入,并使用超声距离换能器测量胸廓扩张情况。重症护理护士能够为82%的儿童置入喉罩气道并成功通气,相比之下,使用面罩和口咽气道的成功率为70%,尽管差异无统计学意义(p = 0.136)。使用喉罩气道首次成功通气的中位时间为39秒,而使用面罩为25秒(p < 0.001)。在这组护士中,我们未发现通过喉罩气道或面罩通气存在差异,尽管面罩通气更快实现。