• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

手动除颤:双相体外除颤期间通过直接接触患者的施救者的电流分析

Hands-on defibrillation: an analysis of electrical current flow through rescuers in direct contact with patients during biphasic external defibrillation.

作者信息

Lloyd Michael S, Heeke Brian, Walter Paul F, Langberg Jonathan J

机构信息

Emory University Hospital, Cardiac Electrophysiology Department, 1364 Clifton Rd NE, Suite F424, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.

出版信息

Circulation. 2008 May 13;117(19):2510-4. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.763011. Epub 2008 May 5.

DOI:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.763011
PMID:18458166
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Brief interruptions in chest compressions reduce the efficacy of resuscitation from cardiac arrest. Interruptions of this type are inevitable during hands-off periods for shock delivery to treat ventricular tachyarrhythmias. The safety of a rescuer remaining in contact with a patient being shocked with modern defibrillation equipment has not been investigated.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This study measured the leakage voltage and current through mock rescuers while they were compressing the chests of 43 patients receiving external biphasic shocks. During the shock, the rescuer's gloved hand was pressed onto the skin of the patient's anterior chest. To simulate the worst case of an inadvertent return current pathway, a skin electrode on the rescuers thigh was connected to an electrode on the patient's shoulder. In no cases were shocks perceptible to the rescuer. Peak potential differences between the rescuer's wrist and thigh ranged from 0.28 to 14 V (mean 5.8+/-5.8 V). The average leakage current flowing through the rescuer's body for each phase of the shock waveform was 283+/-140 microA (range 18.9 to 907 microA). This was below several recommended safety standards for leakage current.

CONCLUSIONS

Rescuers performing chest compressions during biphasic external defibrillation are exposed to low levels of leakage current. The present findings support the feasibility of uninterrupted chest compressions during shock delivery, which may enhance the efficacy of defibrillation and cardiocerebral resuscitation.

摘要

背景

胸外按压的短暂中断会降低心脏骤停复苏的效果。在进行电击治疗室性快速心律失常的非按压期间,这种中断是不可避免的。尚未研究救援人员在使用现代除颤设备对患者进行电击时与患者保持接触的安全性。

方法与结果

本研究测量了43例接受体外双相电击患者在胸外按压时通过模拟救援人员的漏电压和漏电流。在电击期间,救援人员戴手套的手按压在患者前胸皮肤上。为模拟意外返回电流通路的最坏情况,将救援人员大腿上的皮肤电极与患者肩部的电极相连。在所有情况下,救援人员均未感觉到电击。救援人员手腕与大腿之间的峰值电位差在0.28至14V之间(平均5.8±5.8V)。电击波形每个阶段流经救援人员身体的平均漏电流为283±140μA(范围为18.9至907μA)。这低于几个推荐的漏电流安全标准。

结论

在双相体外除颤期间进行胸外按压的救援人员会暴露于低水平的漏电流。目前的研究结果支持在电击期间进行不间断胸外按压的可行性,这可能会提高除颤和心肺复苏的效果。

相似文献

1
Hands-on defibrillation: an analysis of electrical current flow through rescuers in direct contact with patients during biphasic external defibrillation.手动除颤:双相体外除颤期间通过直接接触患者的施救者的电流分析
Circulation. 2008 May 13;117(19):2510-4. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.763011. Epub 2008 May 5.
2
Hands-on defibrillation with a safety barrier: An analysis of potential risk to rescuers.带安全屏障的手动除颤:对施救者潜在风险的分析。
Resuscitation. 2019 May;138:110-113. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2019.02.043. Epub 2019 Mar 9.
3
Minimal interruption of cardiopulmonary resuscitation for a single shock as mandated by automated external defibrillations does not compromise outcomes in a porcine model of cardiac arrest and resuscitation.在猪心脏骤停与复苏模型中,按照自动体外除颤器的要求,单次电击时对心肺复苏的干扰最小化并不会影响复苏结果。
Crit Care Med. 2008 Nov;36(11):3048-53. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318186f612.
4
The resuscitation blanket: a useful tool for "hands-on" defibrillation.复苏毯:“动手”除颤的有用工具。
Resuscitation. 2010 Feb;81(2):230-5. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.09.029. Epub 2009 Dec 4.
5
Achieving safe hands-on defibrillation using electrical safety gloves--a clinical evaluation.使用电安全手套实现安全的手动除颤——一项临床评估。
Resuscitation. 2015 May;90:163-7. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.12.028. Epub 2015 Feb 26.
6
Electrical injury during "hands on" defibrillation-A potential risk of internal cardioverter defibrillators?“手动”除颤过程中的电击伤——植入式心脏复律除颤器的潜在风险?
Resuscitation. 2009 Jul;80(7):832-4. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.04.010. Epub 2009 May 14.
7
Will medical examination gloves protect rescuers from defibrillation voltages during hands-on defibrillation?在进行徒手除颤时,医用检查手套能否保护救援人员免受除颤电压的伤害?
Resuscitation. 2012 Dec;83(12):1467-72. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2012.07.031. Epub 2012 Aug 25.
8
Hands-on defibrillation has the potential to improve the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and is safe for rescuers-a preclinical study.动手除颤有可能提高心肺复苏的质量,且对救援人员是安全的——一项临床前研究。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2012 Oct;1(5):e001313. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.112.001313. Epub 2012 Oct 25.
9
Hands-on defibrillation during active chest compressions: eliminating another interruption.在进行有效的胸外按压时进行手动除颤:消除另一种中断情况。
Am J Emerg Med. 2016 Nov;34(11):2172-2176. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2016.08.017. Epub 2016 Aug 10.
10
Electrical exposure risk associated with hands-on defibrillation.与手动除颤相关的电击暴露风险。
Resuscitation. 2014 Oct;85(10):1330-6. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.06.023. Epub 2014 Jun 30.

引用本文的文献

1
Defibrillation: prevention, safety and literacy are key.除颤:预防、安全与知识普及是关键。
Resusc Plus. 2025 Aug 23;26:101077. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2025.101077. eCollection 2025 Nov.
2
Risk assessment of electric shock to the general public without Personal Protective Equipment during defibrillation shock delivery: A simulation study.除颤电击时未使用个人防护装备的普通公众电击风险评估:一项模拟研究。
Resusc Plus. 2024 Jul 31;19:100734. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100734. eCollection 2024 Sep.
3
evaluation of personal protective equipment in hands-on defibrillation.
在实际操作除颤中对个人防护装备的评估。
Resusc Plus. 2022 Aug 3;11:100284. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2022.100284. eCollection 2022 Sep.
4
Defibrillation safety: an examination of paramedic perceptions using eye-tracking technology.除颤安全性:使用眼动追踪技术对护理人员认知的考察
BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn. 2015 Sep 3;1(2):62-66. doi: 10.1136/bmjstel-2015-000033. eCollection 2015.
5
Hospital resuscitation teams: a review of the risks to the healthcare worker.医院复苏团队:对医护人员风险的综述
J Intensive Care. 2017 Oct 11;5:59. doi: 10.1186/s40560-017-0253-9. eCollection 2017.
6
Assessing student paramedic visual and verbal checks for defibrillation safety-an observational study.评估护理专业学生对除颤安全性的视觉和口头检查——一项观察性研究。
Springerplus. 2015 Dec 14;4:773. doi: 10.1186/s40064-015-1570-x. eCollection 2015.
7
The effect of compressor-administered defibrillation on peri-shock pauses in a simulated cardiac arrest scenario.在模拟心脏骤停场景中,压缩机辅助除颤对电击周围停顿时间的影响。
West J Emerg Med. 2014 Mar;15(2):246-50. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2013.9.18007.
8
Hands-On defibrillation-the end of "i'm clear, you're clear, we're all clear"?手动除颤——“我没事,你没事,我们都没事”的时代终结了?
J Am Heart Assoc. 2012 Oct;1(5):e005496. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.112.005496. Epub 2012 Oct 25.
9
Hands-on defibrillation has the potential to improve the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and is safe for rescuers-a preclinical study.动手除颤有可能提高心肺复苏的质量,且对救援人员是安全的——一项临床前研究。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2012 Oct;1(5):e001313. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.112.001313. Epub 2012 Oct 25.
10
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation and management of cardiac arrest.心肺复苏和心脏骤停的处理。
Nat Rev Cardiol. 2012 Sep;9(9):499-511. doi: 10.1038/nrcardio.2012.78. Epub 2012 Jun 5.