Institute for Experimental Medical Research, Oslo University Hospital HF, Norway.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2012 Jan;56(1):124-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02566.x. Epub 2011 Oct 19.
Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is important for survival after cardiac arrest. We hypothesized that elderly laypersons would perform CPR poorer in a realistic cardiac arrest simulation, compared to a traditional test.
Sixty-four lay rescuers aged 50-75 were randomized to realistic or traditional test, both with ten minutes of telephone assisted CPR. Realistic simulation started suddenly without warning, leaving the test subject alone in a confined and noisy apartment. Traditional test was conducted in a spacious and calm classroom with a researcher present. CPR performance was recorded with a manikin with human like chest properties. Heart rate and self-reported exhaustion were registered.
CPR quality was not different in the two groups: compression depth, 43 mm ± 7 versus 43 ± 4, P = 0.72; compressions rate, 97 min(-1) ± 11 versus 93 ± 15, P = 0.26; ventilation rate, 2.4 min(-1) ± 1.7 versus 2.8 ± 1.1, P = 0.35; and hands-off time 273 s ± 50 versus 270 ± 66, P = 0.82; in realistic (n = 31) and traditional (n = 33) groups, respectively. No fatigue was evident in the repeated measures analysis of variance. Work load was not different between the groups; attained percentage of age predicted maximum heart rate, 73% ± 9 and 76 ± 11, P = 0.37, reported exhaustion 43 ± 21 (scale: 0 to 100) and 37 ± 19, P = 0.24.
Elderly lay people are capable of performing chest compressions with acceptable quality for ten minutes in a realistic cardiac arrest simulation. Ventilation quality and hands-off time were not adequate in either group.
旁观者心肺复苏(CPR)对于心脏骤停后的生存至关重要。我们假设,与传统测试相比,老年非专业人员在现实的心脏骤停模拟中进行 CPR 的效果较差。
64 名年龄在 50-75 岁的非专业救援人员被随机分配到现实或传统测试中,两种测试均进行十分钟电话辅助 CPR。现实模拟突然开始,没有任何预警,让测试对象独自在一个封闭且嘈杂的公寓中。传统测试在一个宽敞且安静的教室中进行,有一名研究人员在场。使用具有类似人体胸部特性的模型来记录 CPR 表现。记录心率和自我报告的疲劳程度。
两组 CPR 质量没有差异:压缩深度,43mm±7 与 43±4,P=0.72;压缩频率,97min(-1)±11 与 93±15,P=0.26;通气频率,2.4min(-1)±1.7 与 2.8±1.1,P=0.35;以及手离开时间 273s±50 与 270±66,P=0.82;分别在现实(n=31)和传统(n=33)组中。在重复测量方差分析中没有明显的疲劳迹象。两组之间的工作量没有差异;达到年龄预测最大心率的百分比,73%±9 和 76±11,P=0.37,报告的疲劳程度为 43±21(范围:0 至 100)和 37±19,P=0.24。
老年非专业人员能够在现实的心脏骤停模拟中进行十分钟可接受质量的胸外按压。在任何一组中,通气质量和手离开时间都不足。