Austin Andrea L, Spalding Carmen N, Landa Katrina N, Myer Brian R, Cure Donald, Smith Jason E, Platt Gerald, King Heather C
From the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, F. Edward Hébert School of Medicine, Bethesda, MD.
Department of Emergency Medicine.
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2020 Feb;36(2):e79-e84. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000001312.
In effort to improve chest compression quality among health care providers, numerous feedback devices have been developed. Few studies, however, have focused on the use of cardiopulmonary resuscitation feedback devices for infants and children. This study evaluated the quality of chest compressions with standard team-leader coaching, a metronome (MetroTimer by ONYX Apps), and visual feedback (SkillGuide Cardiopulmonary Feedback Device) during simulated infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
Seventy voluntary health care providers who had recently completed Pediatric Advanced Life Support or Basic Life Support courses were randomized to perform simulated infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation into 1 of 3 groups: team-leader coaching alone (control), coaching plus metronome, or coaching plus SkillGuide for 2 minutes continuously. Rate, depth, and frequency of complete recoil during cardiopulmonary resuscitation were recorded by the Laerdal SimPad device for each participant. American Heart Association-approved compression techniques were randomized to either 2-finger or encircling thumbs.
The metronome was associated with more ideal compression rate than visual feedback or coaching alone (104/min vs 112/min and 113/min; P = 0.003, 0.019). Visual feedback was associated with more ideal depth than auditory (41 mm vs 38.9; P = 0.03). There were no significant differences in complete recoil between groups. Secondary outcomes of compression technique revealed a difference of 1 mm. Subgroup analysis of male versus female showed no difference in mean number of compressions (221.76 vs 219.79; P = 0.72), mean compression depth (40.47 vs 39.25; P = 0.09), or rate of complete release (70.27% vs 64.96%; P = 0.54).
In the adult literature, feedback devices often show an increase in quality of chest compressions. Although more studies are needed, this study did not demonstrate a clinically significant improvement in chest compressions with the addition of a metronome or visual feedback device, no clinically significant difference in Pediatric Advanced Life Support-approved compression technique, and no difference between compression quality between genders.
为提高医护人员胸外按压质量,已开发出众多反馈设备。然而,很少有研究关注心肺复苏反馈设备在婴儿和儿童中的应用。本研究评估了在模拟婴儿心肺复苏期间,采用标准团队领导指导、节拍器(ONYX Apps公司的MetroTimer)和视觉反馈(SkillGuide心肺反馈设备)时的胸外按压质量。
70名最近完成儿科高级生命支持或基础生命支持课程的志愿医护人员被随机分为3组,进行2分钟的模拟婴儿心肺复苏:仅团队领导指导(对照组)、指导加节拍器,或指导加SkillGuide。每位参与者的心肺复苏期间的按压速率、深度和完全回弹频率由Laerdal SimPad设备记录。美国心脏协会认可的按压技术随机分为双指法或环抱拇指法。
与单独视觉反馈或指导相比,节拍器与更理想的按压速率相关(104次/分钟 vs 112次/分钟和113次/分钟;P = 0.003,0.019)。视觉反馈与比听觉反馈更理想的深度相关(41毫米 vs 38.9毫米;P = 0.03)。各组间完全回弹无显著差异。按压技术的次要结果显示相差1毫米。男性与女性的亚组分析显示平均按压次数(221.76次 vs 219.79次;P = 0.72)、平均按压深度(40.47毫米 vs 39.25毫米;P = 0.09)或完全回弹率(70.27% vs 64.96%;P = 0.54)无差异。
在成人文献中,反馈设备通常显示胸外按压质量有所提高。尽管还需要更多研究,但本研究未证明添加节拍器或视觉反馈设备能在临床上显著改善胸外按压,在儿科高级生命支持认可的按压技术上无临床显著差异,且性别间的按压质量无差异。