Suppr超能文献

基础生命支持:一种适用于非专业人员培训的工具。

Basic Life Support: an accessible tool in layperson training.

作者信息

Bonizzio Carolina Reis, Nagao Christopher K, Polho Gabriel B, Paes Vitor R

机构信息

. Médica Generalista da FMUSP, diretora da Expedição Cirúrgica da Bandeira Científica (ECBC) em 2016, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

. Médico Generalista da FMUSP, diretor da Expedição Cirúrgica da Bandeira Científica (ECBC)2016, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.

出版信息

Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2019 Nov 7;65(10):1300-1307. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.65.10.1300. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

  1. To evaluate the efficiency of a new method of training laypeople on cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). 2) To assess previous knowledge of the participants.

METHODS

Instructors were trained according to the 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines, with emphasis on CPR. Dummies made with PET bottles were used, and a questionnaire was applied to the participants before and after training. Statistical analysis was performed in the R commander program. Participants with incomplete documents were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

Out of 101 participants, 96 were included: 69 lay people, 17 health professionals, and ten health students. There was an improvement in the overall performance after training (mean pre: 62.7%, mean post: 75.8%, p <0.01), also present in the following main concepts: "mouth-to-mouth breathing is not necessary" (p <0.01), "risk of contamination" (p <0.01), "compression technique" (p <0.01). The concepts "recognition of severity" and "what is chest compression" did not improve, but had good pre-test means, 96.8% and 81.2%. There was no statistical difference in the knowledge between the groups (laypeople vs. health professionals and students, pre=0,06 e post=0,33).

CONCLUSION

The tools used in training were efficient. However, further studies are necessary to assess the long-term impact of this intervention.

摘要

目的

1)评估一种培训非专业人员进行心肺复苏(CPR)的新方法的效率。2)评估参与者之前的知识水平。

方法

根据2015年美国心脏协会指南对培训师进行培训,重点是心肺复苏。使用由PET瓶制成的人体模型,并在培训前后对参与者进行问卷调查。在R commander程序中进行统计分析。文件不完整的参与者被排除在研究之外。

结果

101名参与者中,96名被纳入研究:69名非专业人员、17名卫生专业人员和10名卫生专业学生。培训后整体表现有所改善(培训前平均:62.7%,培训后平均:75.8%,p<0.01),以下主要概念也有改善:“口对口呼吸不必要”(p<0.01)、“污染风险”(p<0.01)、“按压技术”(p<0.01)。“严重程度识别”和“什么是胸外按压”这两个概念没有改善,但预测试平均水平良好,分别为96.8%和81.2%。两组之间的知识水平没有统计学差异(非专业人员与卫生专业人员和学生相比,培训前=0.06,培训后=0.33)。

结论

培训中使用的工具是有效的。然而,需要进一步研究来评估这种干预的长期影响。

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