Abelairas-Gómez Cristian, Barcala-Furelos Roberto, Mecías-Calvo Marcos, Rey-Eiras Ezequiel, López-García Sergio, Costas-Veiga Javier, Bores-Cerezal Antonio, Palacios-Aguilar Jose
School of Nursing, CLINURSID Network Research, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain (Drs Abelairas-Gómez and Barcala-Furelos); Faculty of Health Sciences, European Atlantic University, Santander, Spain (Drs Abelairas-Gómez and Mecías-Calvo, Mr Costas-Veiga, and Dr Bores-Cerezal).
School of Nursing, CLINURSID Network Research, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain (Drs Abelairas-Gómez and Barcala-Furelos); Faculty of Education and Sport Sciences, University of Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain (Drs Barcala-Furelos and Rey-Eiras, and Mr Costas-Veiga); IDRA, International Drowning Research Alliance, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Dr Barcala-Furelos).
Wilderness Environ Med. 2017 Sep;28(3):176-184. doi: 10.1016/j.wem.2017.03.013. Epub 2017 Jul 26.
To analyze the influence of fins and rescue tube use in a water rescue, assessed by time and distance to salvage position, physiological parameters, and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).
Twenty professional lifeguards (10 men, 10 women) conducted 3 tests: a baseline test of 5 minutes of CPR and 2 water rescues, 1 without rescue equipment (NRE), and the other with fins and rescue tube (FRT). They also had to perform 5 minutes of CPR after each rescue. Time and distance of the rescues, physiological parameters (blood lactate concentration and heart rate), and quality of CPR were analyzed.
CPR quality worsened by 26 to 28% (P < .001) after rescue. However, there were no differences using FRT. The use of rescue equipment reduced the time (FRT: 216±57 seconds; NRE: 319±127 seconds; P < .001) and distance covered (FRT: 265±52 m; NRE: 326±41 m; P < .001). No differences were found in lactate levels between FRT and NRE just after the rescues, but there were some after 5 minutes of subsequent CPR (FRT: 10.7±2.2 mmol/L; NRE: 12.6±1.8 mmol/L; P < .001). Comparing women with men, we found significant differences in lactate concentrations only in FRT (women: 9.6±1.4 mmol/L; men: 8.1±1.2 mmol/L; P = .031).
The use of fins and rescue tube provides a comprehensive benefit in an aquatic emergency. However, FRT did not have any effect on the quality of the postrescue CPR.
通过到达打捞位置的时间和距离、生理参数以及心肺复苏(CPR)来分析鳍状肢和救援管在水上救援中的影响。
20名专业救生员(10名男性,10名女性)进行了3项测试:5分钟心肺复苏的基线测试以及2次水上救援,1次不使用救援设备(NRE),另1次使用鳍状肢和救援管(FRT)。每次救援后他们还必须进行5分钟的心肺复苏。分析了救援的时间和距离、生理参数(血乳酸浓度和心率)以及心肺复苏的质量。
救援后心肺复苏质量恶化了26%至28%(P <.001)。然而,使用FRT没有差异。使用救援设备减少了时间(FRT:216±57秒;NRE:319±127秒;P <.001)和行进距离(FRT:265±52米;NRE:326±41米;P <.001)。救援刚结束时,FRT和NRE的乳酸水平没有差异,但在随后的5分钟心肺复苏后有差异(FRT:10.7±2.2毫摩尔/升;NRE:12.6±1.8毫摩尔/升;P <.001)。比较女性和男性,我们发现仅在FRT中乳酸浓度存在显著差异(女性:9.6±1.4毫摩尔/升;男性:8.1±1.2毫摩尔/升;P =.031)。
在水上紧急情况中,使用鳍状肢和救援管具有全面的益处。然而,FRT对救援后心肺复苏的质量没有任何影响。