Suppr超能文献

缩短的单纯胸外按压训练与传统训练后心肺复苏技能的长期保持:一项随机对照试验

Long-term retention of cardiopulmonary resuscitation skills after shortened chest compression-only training and conventional training: a randomized controlled trial.

作者信息

Nishiyama Chika, Iwami Taku, Kitamura Tetsuhisa, Ando Masahiko, Sakamoto Tetsuya, Marukawa Seishiro, Kawamura Takashi

机构信息

Department of Pharmacoepidemiology, Graduate School of Medicine and Public Health, Kyoto University, Kyoto; Kyoto University Health Service, Kyoto.

出版信息

Acad Emerg Med. 2014 Jan;21(1):47-54. doi: 10.1111/acem.12293.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

It is unclear how much the length of a cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training program can be reduced without ruining its effectiveness. The authors aimed to compare CPR skills 6 months and 1 year after training between shortened chest compression-only CPR training and conventional CPR training.

METHODS

Participants were randomly assigned to either the compression-only CPR group, which underwent a 45-minute training program consisting of chest compressions and automated external defibrillator (AED) use with personal training manikins, or the conventional CPR group, which underwent a 180-minute training program with chest compressions, rescue breathing, and AED use. Participants' resuscitation skills were evaluated 6 months and 1 year after the training. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of appropriate chest compressions 1 year after the training.

RESULTS

A total of 146 persons were enrolled, and 63 (87.5%) in the compression-only CPR group and 56 (75.7%) in the conventional CPR group completed the 1-year evaluation. The compression-only CPR group was superior to the conventional CPR group regarding the proportion of appropriate chest compression (mean ± SD = 59.8% ± 40.0% vs. 46.3% ± 28.6%; p = 0.036) and the number of appropriate chest compressions (mean ± SD = 119.5 ± 80.0 vs. 77.2 ± 47.8; p = 0.001). Time without chest compression in the compression-only CPR group was significantly shorter than that in the conventional CPR group (mean ± SD = 11.8 ± 21.1 seconds vs. 52.9 ± 14.9 seconds; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The shortened compression-only CPR training program appears to help the general public retain CPR skills better than the conventional CPR training program.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN-CTR UMIN000001675.

摘要

目的

目前尚不清楚心肺复苏(CPR)培训项目的时长能缩短多少而不影响其效果。作者旨在比较仅进行胸外按压的缩短版CPR培训与传统CPR培训在培训后6个月和1年时的CPR技能。

方法

参与者被随机分配到仅胸外按压CPR组,该组接受一个45分钟的培训项目,内容包括使用个人训练模拟人进行胸外按压和自动体外除颤器(AED)操作;或传统CPR组,该组接受一个180分钟的培训项目,内容包括胸外按压、人工呼吸和AED操作。在培训后6个月和1年对参与者的复苏技能进行评估。主要结局指标是培训后1年时正确胸外按压的比例。

结果

共纳入146人,仅胸外按压CPR组63人(87.5%)、传统CPR组56人(75.7%)完成了1年评估。在正确胸外按压比例方面(均值±标准差=59.8%±40.0%对46.3%±28.6%;p=0.036)以及正确胸外按压次数方面(均值±标准差=119.5±80.0对77.2±47.8;p=0.001),仅胸外按压CPR组优于传统CPR组。仅胸外按压CPR组胸外按压中断时间显著短于传统CPR组(均值±标准差=11.8±21.1秒对52.9±14.9秒;p<0.001)。

结论

缩短的仅胸外按压CPR培训项目似乎比传统CPR培训项目能更好地帮助公众保持CPR技能。

临床试验注册

UMIN-CTR UMIN000001675

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验