Augusto João B, Santos Miguel B, Faria Daniel, Alves Paulo, Roque David, Morais José, Gil Victor, Morais Carlos
Department of Cardiology, Hospital Professor Doutor Fernando Fonseca, Lisbon, Portugal.
Institute of Cardiovascular Science, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Bull Emerg Trauma. 2020 Jul;8(3):135-141. doi: 10.30476/BEAT.2020.83080.
To evaluate the impact of a real-time visual feedback device on Chest comparison (CCs) rate and depth delivered by healthcare professionals.
In a simulated scenario a sensor was placed on a manikin's chest and connected to a defibrillator which provided real-time visual feedback on the rate and depth of CCs. Thirty-two healthcare professionals performed sequentially 5 cycles of 30 CCs without (FeedOFF) and with (FeedON) feedback. CCs with a depth between 50 and 60mm and a rate between 100 and 120cpm were considered optimal.
Visual feedback resulted in a significant increase in the proportion of CCs with optimal depth (median 8.7 [interquartile range 0.7-55.5]% FeedOFF vs 63.3 [17.6-88.1]% FeedON, p=0.002) and optimal rate (median 51.3 [1.3 - 81.3]% FeedOFF vs 68.3 [45.3 - 86.1]% FeedON, =0.018). Overall, CCs were too shallow and too fast in the FeedOFF cycle. There was also a significant increase in optimal CCs (optimal depth and rate) with the use of the feedback device (from median 0.7 [0 - 26.9]% FeedOFF to 31.9 [3.6-59.9]% FeedON, =0.001). Participants' factors such as age, sex, body mass index, job or time since last CPR training did not have a significant impact on CPR quality.
In the absence of visual feedback, there is a tendency towards lower depth and higher rate of CCs. The use of feedback technology significantly improves the quality of CCs.
评估一种实时视觉反馈设备对医护人员进行胸外按压（CCs）的速率和深度的影响。
在模拟场景中，将一个传感器放置在人体模型胸部，并连接到除颤器，该除颤器可提供有关胸外按压速率和深度的实时视觉反馈。32名医护人员依次进行5个周期的30次胸外按压，其中一组无反馈（FeedOFF），另一组有反馈（FeedON）。深度在50至60毫米之间且速率在每分钟100至120次之间的胸外按压被视为最佳。
视觉反馈使具有最佳深度的胸外按压比例显著增加（中位数8.7[四分位间距0.7 - 55.5]%，FeedOFF组对比63.3[17.6 - 88.1]%，FeedON组，p = 0.002）以及最佳速率（中位数51.3[1.3 - 81.3]%，FeedOFF组对比68.3[45.3 - 86.1]%，FeedON组，p = 0.018）。总体而言，在FeedOFF周期中胸外按压过浅且过快。使用反馈设备后，最佳胸外按压（最佳深度和速率）也显著增加（从中位数0.7[0 - 26.9]%，FeedOFF组增至31.9[3.6 - 59.9]%，FeedON组，p = 0.001）。参与者的年龄、性别、体重指数、工作或自上次心肺复苏培训后的时间等因素对心肺复苏质量没有显著影响。
在没有视觉反馈的情况下，胸外按压有深度降低和速率升高的趋势。反馈技术的使用显著提高了胸外按压的质量。
