Suppr超能文献

院外心脏骤停后,以医生为主导的心肺复苏对神经功能完整存活的影响:一项全国范围内基于人群的观察性研究。

Impact of prehospital physician-led cardiopulmonary resuscitation on neurologically intact survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A nationwide population-based observational study.

机构信息

Department of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Kanazawa University Hospital, Kanazawa, Japan.

Department of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Kanazawa University Hospital, Kanazawa, Japan.

出版信息

Resuscitation. 2019 Mar;136:38-46. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.11.014. Epub 2018 Nov 15.

Abstract

AIM

The impact of prehospital physician care for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) on long-term neurological outcome is unclear. We aimed to determine the association between emergency medical services (EMS) physician-led cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) versus paramedic-led CPR and neurologically intact survival after OHCA.

METHODS

We assessed 613,251 patients using All-Japan Utstein Registry data from 2011 to 2015 retrospectively. The main outcome measure was 1-month neurologically intact survival after OHCA, defined as Cerebral Performance Category 1 or 2 (CPC 1-2).

RESULTS

Before propensity score matching, the 1-month CPC 1-2 rate was significantly higher in EMS physician-led CPR than in paramedic-led CPR [5.7% (1114/19,551) vs. 2.5% (14,859/593,700), P < 0.001; adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 1.50; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.40-1.61]. After propensity score matching, EMS physician-led CPR showed more favourable neurological outcomes than paramedic-led CPR [6.0% (996/16,612) vs. 4.6% (766/16,612), P < 0.001; aOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.29-1.60]. In most subgroup analyses after matching, physician-led CPR had higher 1-month CPC 1-2 rates than paramedic-led CPR did; however, 1-month CPC 1-2 rates were similar between the two CPR configurations for patients aged <18 years (5.6% vs. 8.2%, P = 0.10; aOR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.46-1.47) and those who received bystander defibrillation (26.3% vs. 21.5%; P = 0.10; aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.74-1.53).

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of this retrospective observational research, EMS physician-led CPR for OHCA was associated with improved 1-month neurologically intact survival compared with paramedic-led CPR. However, neurologically intact survival was similar for patients aged <18 years and those receiving bystander defibrillation.

摘要

目的

院前医师对院外心脏骤停(OHCA)的治疗对长期神经预后的影响尚不清楚。我们旨在确定急救医疗服务(EMS)医师主导的心肺复苏(CPR)与护理人员主导的 CPR 与 OHCA 后神经完整存活之间的关联。

方法

我们使用 2011 年至 2015 年的全日本 Utstein 注册数据回顾性评估了 613251 例患者。主要结局指标为 OHCA 后 1 个月的神经完整存活,定义为脑功能状态分类 1 或 2(CPC 1-2)。

结果

在进行倾向评分匹配之前,EMS 医师主导的 CPR 后 1 个月 CPC 1-2 率明显高于护理人员主导的 CPR [5.7%(1114/19551)与 2.5%(14859/593700),P<0.001;调整后的优势比(aOR),1.50;95%置信区间(CI),1.40-1.61]。在倾向评分匹配后,EMS 医师主导的 CPR 显示出比护理人员主导的 CPR 更有利的神经结局[6.0%(996/16612)与 4.6%(766/16612),P<0.001;aOR,1.44;95%CI,1.29-1.60]。在匹配后的大多数亚组分析中,医师主导的 CPR 后 1 个月 CPC 1-2 率高于护理人员主导的 CPR;然而,对于年龄<18 岁的患者(5.6%比 8.2%,P=0.10;aOR,0.82;95%CI,0.46-1.47)和接受旁观者除颤的患者(26.3%比 21.5%,P=0.10;aOR,1.07;95%CI,0.74-1.53),两种 CPR 模式的 1 个月 CPC 1-2 率相似。

结论

在这项回顾性观察性研究的限制范围内,与护理人员主导的 CPR 相比,EMS 医师主导的 OHCA 心肺复苏与改善 1 个月神经完整存活有关。然而,对于年龄<18 岁的患者和接受旁观者除颤的患者,神经完整存活率相似。

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