Kovic Ivor, Lulic Dinka, Lulic Ileana
Institute of Emergency Medicine of Istria County, Emergency Medical Service Pazin, Pazin, Croatia.
J Emerg Med. 2013 Oct;45(4):570-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2013.04.021. Epub 2013 Jul 8.
The performance of high-quality chest compressions with minimal interruptions is one of the most important elements of the "Chain of Survival."
To evaluate the impact of a novel CPR PRO(®) (CPRO) device for manual chest compression on rescuer fatigue, pain, and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) quality.
Randomized crossover trial of 24 health care professionals performing continuous chest compression CPR for 10 min with a CPRO device and conventional manual CPR (MCPR). Data about chest compressions were recorded using a manikin. Rescuers' physiologic signs were recorded before and after each session, and heart rate (HR) data were tracked continuously. Fatigue was assessed with ratings of perceived exertion, and pain questionnaire.
All subjects completed 10 min of CPR with both methods. Significantly more rest breaks were taken during MCPR sessions (1.7 ± 2 vs. 0.21 ± 0.72). Subjects' perceived exertion was higher after MCPR, as well as the average (120.7 ± 16.8 vs. 110.8 ± 17.6) and maximal HR (134.3 ± 18.5 vs. 123.42 ± 16.5) during testing. Subjects reported more pain in the hands, especially the wrist, after performing MCPR. Average depth of compressions was higher with the CPRO device (4.6 ± 7.0 vs. 4.3 ± 7.9) and declined more slowly over time. Other CPR quality parameters, such as the correct position and complete release of pressure, were also better for CPRO CPR.
CPRO device reduces rescuer fatigue and pain during continuous chest compression CPR, which results in a higher quality of CPR in a simulation setting.
高质量且中断最少的胸外按压是“生存链”中最重要的环节之一。
评估一种新型的用于手动胸外按压的CPR PRO(®)(CPRO)设备对施救者疲劳、疼痛及心肺复苏(CPR)质量的影响。
24名医护人员参与的随机交叉试验,他们分别使用CPRO设备和传统手动CPR(MCPR)进行持续10分钟的胸外按压CPR。使用人体模型记录胸外按压数据。在每次操作前后记录施救者的生理体征,并持续跟踪心率(HR)数据。通过主观用力程度评分和疼痛问卷评估疲劳情况。
所有受试者均用两种方法完成了10分钟的CPR。在MCPR操作过程中,休息时间明显更多(1.7±2 对比 0.21±0.72)。MCPR后受试者的主观用力程度更高,测试期间的平均心率(120.7±16.8对比110.8±17.6)和最大心率(134.3±18.5对比123.42±16.5)也更高。进行MCPR后,受试者报告手部尤其是手腕处疼痛更明显。CPRO设备的平均按压深度更高(4.6±7.0对比4.3±7.9),且随时间下降更缓慢。其他CPR质量参数,如正确的位置和完全的压力释放,CPRO CPR也表现更好。
CPRO设备在持续胸外按压CPR过程中可减轻施救者的疲劳和疼痛,在模拟环境中可带来更高质量的CPR。