Prehosp Emerg Care. 2021 Mar-Apr;25(2):235-267. doi: 10.1080/10903127.2020.1743801. Epub 2020 Apr 27.
Trauma, with resultant bleeding, is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world; however, the best possible method of bleeding control by immediate responders is unknown. We performed a systematic review of the effectiveness of treatment modalities for severe, life-threatening external bleeding in the out-of-hospital first aid setting. We followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions methodology and report results according to PRISMA guidelines. We included randomized controlled trials, non-randomized comparative studies and case series investigating adults and children with severe, life-threatening external bleeding who were treated with therapies potentially suitable for first aid providers. We assessed the certainty of the evidence and risk of bias. Outcomes were prioritized by first aid specialists based on importance for patients and decision-makers and included mortality due to bleeding, all-cause mortality, cessation of bleeding, time to cessation of bleeding, a decrease in bleeding, and complications/adverse effects. Results were reported in Evidence Profiles. Of the 1,051 full-text articles screened, 107 were included for analysis including 22,798 patients. The primary methods of bleeding control were tourniquets ( = 49), hemostatic dressings ( = 34), hemostatic devices ( = 14), pressure dressings/bandages/devices ( = 8), pressure points ( = 4), including 2 studies that reported multiple hemorrhage control methods. Overall, certainty of evidence was very low and often relied on indirect evidence and poorly controlled studies. Tourniquets were associated with a decrease in mortality when compared with direct manual pressure. Hemostatic dressings resulted in a shorter time to hemostasis than direct manual pressure using standard dressings. Direct manual compression resulted in a shorter time to hemostasis than pressure dressings/devices. Overall, data regarding the control of life-threatening bleeding is of very low certainty, making it difficult to draw robust conclusions for treatment by immediate responders. While more robust data is needed on first aid treatments of life-threatening bleeding, this systematic review aggregates the most comprehensive to date to help guide recommendations. bleeding; hemorrhage; tourniquet; hemostatic dressing; direct pressure.
创伤会导致出血,是全世界发病率和死亡率的重要原因;然而,急救人员控制出血的最佳方法尚不清楚。我们对院外急救环境中严重危及生命的外部出血的治疗方法的有效性进行了系统评价。我们遵循 Cochrane 干预措施系统评价手册,并根据 PRISMA 指南报告结果。我们纳入了随机对照试验、非随机对照研究和病例系列研究,纳入了接受急救人员可能适用的治疗方法治疗的严重危及生命的外部出血的成人和儿童。我们评估了证据的确定性和偏倚风险。根据急救专家对患者和决策者的重要性对结局进行了优先级排序,包括出血导致的死亡率、全因死亡率、出血停止、出血停止时间、出血减少和并发症/不良影响。结果以证据简介报告。在筛选出的 1051 篇全文文章中,有 107 篇被纳入分析,包括 22798 名患者。主要的止血方法包括止血带( = 49)、止血敷料( = 34)、止血装置( = 14)、压力敷料/绷带/装置( = 8)、压迫点( = 4),其中 2 项研究报告了多种控制出血的方法。总体而言,证据的确定性非常低,并且常常依赖于间接证据和控制不佳的研究。与直接手动施压相比,止血带可降低死亡率。与使用标准敷料的直接手动施压相比,止血敷料可更快达到止血。与压力敷料/装置相比,直接手动施压可更快达到止血。总的来说,关于危及生命的出血控制的数据确定性非常低,因此很难为急救人员的治疗得出可靠的结论。虽然需要更多关于危及生命的出血急救治疗的数据,但本系统评价汇总了迄今为止最全面的数据,以帮助指导建议。出血;出血;止血带;止血敷料;直接施压。