REMOSS research group, Faculty of Education and Sports Sciences, Universidade de Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain; CLINURSID Research Group, Psychiatry, Radiology, Public Health, Nursing and Medicine Department, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain; Santiago de Compostela's Health Research Institute (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain; IDRA, International Drowning Researchers' Alliance, Kuna, ID, USA.
IDRA, International Drowning Researchers' Alliance, Kuna, ID, USA; Nile Swimmers NGO, United Kingdom.
Am J Emerg Med. 2021 Jun;44:38-44. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2021.01.069. Epub 2021 Jan 31.
Many victims of drowning fatalities are lay-people attempting to rescue another. This review aims to identify the safest techniques and equipment (improved or purpose made) for an untrained bystander to use when attempting a water rescue.
A sample of 249 papers were included after the bibliographic search, in which 19 were finally selected following PRISMA methodology and 3 peer review proceeding presented at international conferences. A total of 22 documents were added to qualitative synthesis.
Geographical location, economic level, physical fitness, or experience may vary the profile of the lay-rescuers and how to safely perform a water rescue. Four lay-rescuers profiles were identified: 1) Children rescuing children in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), 2) Adults rescuing adults or children, 3) Lay-people with some experience and rescue training, 4) Lay-people with cultural or professional motivations. Three types of techniques used by those lay-rescuers profiles: a) non-contact techniques for rescues from land: throw and reach, b) non-contact techniques for rescue using a flotation device and, c) contact techniques for rescue into the water: swim and tow with or without fins.
The expert recommendation of the safest technique for a lay-rescuer is to attempt rescue using a pole, rope, or flotation equipment without entering the water. However, despite the recommendations of non-contact rescues from land, there is a global tendency to attempt contact rescues in the water, despite a lack of evidence on which technique, procedure or equipment contributes to a safer rescue. Training strategies for lay-people should be considered.
许多溺水死亡事件的受害者都是试图营救他人的非专业人员。本综述旨在确定非专业人员在尝试进行水上救援时使用的最安全的技术和设备(改进或专用)。
在文献检索后,共纳入了 249 篇论文,其中 19 篇最终按照 PRISMA 方法和 3 篇在国际会议上发表的同行评审论文进行了选择。共有 22 篇文献被纳入定性综合分析。
地理位置、经济水平、身体素质或经验可能会改变非专业救援人员的情况以及如何安全地进行水上救援。确定了 4 种非专业救援人员的角色:1)在中低收入国家(LMICs)中,儿童营救儿童;2)成年人营救成年人或儿童;3)有一定经验和救援培训的非专业人员;4)具有文化或专业动机的非专业人员。这些非专业救援人员使用了 3 种技术:a)从陆地进行非接触式救援:投掷和延伸;b)使用漂浮设备进行非接触式救援;c)进入水中的接触式救援:带或不带脚蹼的游泳和拖曳。
对于非专业救援人员,专家建议最安全的技术是使用杆子、绳子或漂浮设备进行救援,而不要进入水中。然而,尽管有从陆地进行非接触式救援的建议,但全球仍倾向于尝试在水中进行接触式救援,尽管缺乏哪种技术、程序或设备有助于更安全的救援的证据。应考虑针对非专业人员的培训策略。