REMOSS Research Group, Faculty of Education and Sports Sciences of Pontevedra, University of Vigo, Spain.
Galician Health System (SERGAS), Galicia, Spain.
Am J Emerg Med. 2021 May;43:1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2020.12.086. Epub 2021 Jan 8.
To assess the differences in the quality and self-perception of CPR performed with foot technique compared to the standard technique with the hands in nursing students.
65 university nursing students participated in a randomized simulation crossover design study. The participants randomly performed two CPR tests: CPR by foot and CPR by hands techniques. The compression-only protocol with a 2-min test was used with the Resusci Anne QCPR® manikin and Wireless Skill Reporter® software, both from Laerdal.
Participants had lower quality when doing CPR by foot (72%) than when doing standard CPR (91%) (p = 0.006). 95% of the participants indicated standard CPR as the technique of choice, while 92% indicated that they would use CPR by foot if it was not possible to perform standard technique.
CPR quality was lower when performing foot technique, although with positive results. It would be advisable for people with acquired CPR skills to know that they can do foot compressions in situations where they cannot use their hands.
评估与手部标准技术相比,护理学生使用脚部技术进行心肺复苏术(CPR)的质量和自我感知差异。
65 名大学护理学生参与了一项随机模拟交叉设计研究。参与者随机进行了两次 CPR 测试:脚部 CPR 和手部 CPR 技术。使用 Resusci Anne QCPR®模型和 Wireless Skill Reporter®软件进行仅按压的协议,测试时间为 2 分钟,均来自 Laerdal。
与标准 CPR(91%)相比,参与者进行脚部 CPR 时的质量较低(72%)(p=0.006)。95%的参与者表示标准 CPR 是首选技术,而 92%的参与者表示如果无法进行标准技术,他们将使用脚部 CPR。
虽然结果为阳性,但进行脚部技术时 CPR 的质量较低。对于已经掌握 CPR 技能的人来说,了解他们在无法使用手的情况下可以进行脚部按压是明智的。