Suppr超能文献

经验不足与经验丰富的急救人员在气管插管、联合导气管和喉罩气道方面的比较:一项人体模型研究。

Comparison of endotracheal intubation, combitube, and laryngeal mask airway between inexperienced and experienced emergency medical staff: A manikin study.

作者信息

Saeedi Morteza, Hajiseyedjavadi Houman, Seyedhosseini Javad, Eslami Vahid, Sheikhmotaharvahedi Hojat

机构信息

Department of Emergency, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran ; Department of Emergency Medicine, Pre-Hospital Emergency Research Center, Shariati Hospital, Tehran Univeristy of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Department of Emergency, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci. 2014 Oct-Dec;4(4):303-8. doi: 10.4103/2229-5151.147533.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Emergency Medical Service (EMS) personnel manage the airway, but only a group of them are allowed to engage in Endotracheal Intubation (ETI). Our purpose was to evaluate if the use of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) or Combitube can be used by inexperienced care providers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A randomized, prospective manikin study was conducted. Fifty-nine participants were randomly assigned into two groups. Experienced group included 16 paramedics, eight anesthetic-technicians, and inexperienced group included 27 Emergency Medical Technician-Basic (EMT-B) and eight nurses. Our main outcomes were success rate and time to airway after only one attempt.

RESULTS

Airway success was 73% for ETI, 98.3% for LMA, and 100% for Combitube. LMA and Combitube were faster and had greater success than ETI (P = 0.0001). Inexperienced had no differences in time to securing LMA compared with experienced (6.05 vs. 5.4 seconds, respectively, P = 0.26). One failure in inexperienced, and no failure in experienced group occurred to secure the LMA (P = 0.59). The median time to Combitube placement in experienced and inexperienced was 5.05 vs. 5.00 seconds, P = 0.65, respectively. Inexperienced and experienced groups performed ETI in 19.15 and 17 seconds, respectively (P = 0.001). After the trial, 78% preferred Combitube, 15.3% LMA, and 6.8% ETI as the device of choice in prehospital setting.

CONCLUSION

Time to airway was decreased and success rate increased significantly with the use of LMA and combitube compared with ETI, regardless of the experience level. This study suggests that both Combitube and LMA may be acceptable choices for management of airway in the prehospital setting for experienced and especially inexperienced EMS personnel.

摘要

背景

紧急医疗服务(EMS)人员负责气道管理,但只有其中一组人员被允许进行气管插管(ETI)。我们的目的是评估经验不足的护理人员是否可以使用喉罩气道(LMA)或食管气管联合导管。

材料与方法

进行了一项随机、前瞻性人体模型研究。59名参与者被随机分为两组。经验丰富组包括16名护理人员、8名麻醉技师,经验不足组包括27名急救医疗技术员基础级(EMT - B)和8名护士。我们的主要结果是仅一次尝试后的成功率和建立气道的时间。

结果

ETI的气道成功率为73%,LMA为98.3%,食管气管联合导管为100%。LMA和食管气管联合导管比ETI更快且成功率更高(P = 0.0001)。经验不足者与经验丰富者在插入LMA的时间上无差异(分别为6.05秒和5.4秒,P = 0.26)。经验不足组在插入LMA时出现1次失败,经验丰富组无失败(P = 0.59)。经验丰富组和经验不足组放置食管气管联合导管的中位时间分别为5.05秒和5.00秒,P = 0.65。经验不足组和经验丰富组进行ETI的时间分别为19.15秒和17秒(P = 0.001)。试验后,78%的人更喜欢食管气管联合导管,15.3%的人更喜欢LMA,6.8%的人更喜欢ETI作为院前环境中的首选设备。

结论

与ETI相比,使用LMA和食管气管联合导管可缩短建立气道的时间并显著提高成功率,无论经验水平如何。这项研究表明,食管气管联合导管和LMA对于经验丰富的EMS人员尤其是经验不足的人员来说,可能都是院前气道管理的可接受选择。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ec76/4296333/89df66e04496/IJCIIS-4-303-g002.jpg

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