Suppr超能文献

用力推,快速推,如果你在市区:对美国和欧洲基本生命支持指南中城市中心主义的引文审查。

Push hard, push fast, if you're downtown: a citation review of urban-centrism in American and European basic life support guidelines.

机构信息

Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Toronto, ON M5S 3M2, Canada.

出版信息

Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2013 Apr 20;21:32. doi: 10.1186/1757-7241-21-32.

Abstract

Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) improves out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survival. In settings with prolonged ambulance response times, skilled bystanders may be even more crucial. In 2010, American Heart Association (AHA) and European Resuscitation Council (ERC) introduced compression-only CPR as an alternative to conventional bystander CPR under some circumstances. The purpose of this citation review and document analysis is to determine whether the evidentiary basis for 2010 AHA and ERC guidelines attends to settings with prolonged ambulance response times or no formal ambulance dispatch services. Primary and secondary citations referring to epidemiological research comparing adult OHCA survival based on the type of bystander CPR were included in the analysis. Details extracted from the citations included a study description and primary outcome measure, the geographic location in which the study occurred, EMS response times, the role of dispatchers, and main findings and summary statistics regarding rates of survival among patients receiving no CPR, conventional CPR or compression-only CPR. The inclusion criteria were met by 10 studies. 9 studies took place exclusively in urban settings. Ambulance dispatchers played an integral role in 7 studies. The cited studies suggest either no survival benefit or harm arising from compression-only CPR in settings with extended ambulance response times. The evidentiary basis for 2010 AHA and ERC bystander CPR guidelines does not attend to settings without rapid ambulance response times or dispatch services. Standardized bystander CPR guidelines may require adaptation or reconsideration in these settings.

摘要

旁观者心肺复苏(CPR)可提高院外心脏骤停(OHCA)的存活率。在救护车反应时间较长的情况下,熟练的旁观者可能更为关键。2010 年,美国心脏协会(AHA)和欧洲复苏委员会(ERC)在某些情况下推出了仅按压式 CPR,作为传统旁观者 CPR 的替代方法。本引文审查和文件分析的目的是确定 2010 年 AHA 和 ERC 指南的证据基础是否针对救护车反应时间较长或没有正式救护车派遣服务的情况。分析中纳入了主要和次要引文,这些引文涉及比较基于旁观者 CPR 类型的成人 OHCA 存活率的流行病学研究。从引文中提取的详细信息包括研究描述和主要结局指标、研究发生的地理位置、EMS 反应时间、调度员的作用,以及关于未接受 CPR、传统 CPR 或仅按压式 CPR 的患者存活率的主要发现和汇总统计数据。符合纳入标准的研究有 10 项。9 项研究仅在城市环境中进行。7 项研究中调度员发挥了重要作用。这些引用的研究表明,在救护车反应时间延长的情况下,仅按压式 CPR 既没有生存获益,也没有危害。2010 年 AHA 和 ERC 旁观者 CPR 指南的证据基础没有针对没有快速救护车反应时间或派遣服务的情况。这些情况下可能需要对标准化的旁观者 CPR 指南进行调整或重新考虑。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d155/3643884/fe9e6543e4be/1757-7241-21-32-1.jpg

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