Suppr超能文献

医院的成人急救团队及其成员能否实施高质量的心肺复苏?一项基于多中心模拟的研究,纳入了针对心肺复苏反馈的教育干预措施。

Can hospital adult code-teams and individual members perform high-quality CPR? A multicenter simulation-based study incorporating an educational intervention with CPR feedback.

作者信息

Rideout Jesse M, Ozawa Edwin T, Bourgeois Darlene J, Chipman Micheline, Overly Frank L

机构信息

Department of Emergency Medicine, Tufts Medical Center, United States.

Department of Anesthesiology, Lahey Hospital & Medical Center, United States.

出版信息

Resusc Plus. 2021 Jun 12;7:100126. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2021.100126. eCollection 2021 Sep.

Abstract

AIMS

A multicenter simulation-based research study to assess the ability of interprofessional code-teams and individual members to perform high-quality CPR (HQ-CPR) at baseline and following an educational intervention with a CPR feedback device.

METHODS

Five centers recruited ten interprofessional teams of AHA-certified adult code-team members with a goal of 200 participants. Baseline testing of chest compression (CC) quality was measured for all individuals. Teams participated in a baseline simulated cardiac arrest (SCA) where CC quality, chest compression fraction (CCF), and peri-shock pauses were recorded. Teams participated in a standardized HQ-CPR and abbreviated TeamSTEPPS® didactic, then engaged in deliberate practice with a CPR feedback device. Individuals were assessed to determine if they could achieve ≥80% combined rate and depth within 2020 AHA guidelines. Teams completed a second SCA and CPR metrics were recorded. Feedback was disabled for assessments except at one site where real-time CPR feedback was the institutional standard. Linear regression models were used to test for site effect and paired -tests to evaluate significant score changes. Logistic univariate regression models were used to explore characteristics associated with the individual achieving competency.

RESULTS

Data from 184 individuals and 45 teams were analyzed. Baseline HQ-CPR mean score across all sites was 18.5% for individuals and 13.8% for teams. Post-intervention HQ-CPR mean score was 59.8% for individuals and 37.0% for teams. There was a statistically significant improvement in HQ-CPR mean scores of 41.3% (36.1, 46.5) for individuals and 23.2% (17.1, 29.3) for teams ( < 0.0001). CCF increased at 3 out of 5 sites and there was a mean 5-s reduction in peri-shock pauses ( < 0.0001). Characteristics with a statistically significant association were height ( = 0.01) and number of times performed CPR ( = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Code-teams and individuals struggle to perform HQ-CPR but show improvement after deliberate practice with feedback as part of an educational intervention. Only one site that incorporated real-time CPR feedback devices routinely achieved ≥80% HQ-CPR.

摘要

目的

一项基于多中心模拟的研究,旨在评估跨专业急救团队及其成员在基线水平以及接受心肺复苏反馈设备教育干预后的高质量心肺复苏(HQ-CPR)执行能力。

方法

五个中心招募了十支由获得美国心脏协会认证的成人急救团队成员组成的跨专业团队,目标是招募200名参与者。对所有个体进行胸外按压(CC)质量的基线测试。各团队参与基线模拟心脏骤停(SCA),记录CC质量、胸外按压分数(CCF)和电击周围暂停时间。各团队参加标准化的HQ-CPR和简化版团队拓展训练(TeamSTEPPS®)教学,然后使用心肺复苏反馈设备进行刻意练习。评估个体是否能在2020年美国心脏协会指南规定的范围内达到≥80%的按压速率和深度组合。各团队完成第二次SCA并记录心肺复苏指标。除了一个将实时心肺复苏反馈作为机构标准的地点外,其他评估均不提供反馈。使用线性回归模型检验地点效应,并使用配对检验评估分数的显著变化。使用逻辑单变量回归模型探索与个体达到能力水平相关的特征。

结果

分析了184名个体和45个团队的数据。所有地点的基线HQ-CPR平均分数,个体为18.5%,团队为13.8%。干预后HQ-CPR平均分数,个体为59.8%,团队为37.0%。个体HQ-CPR平均分数有统计学显著提高,提高了41.3%(36.1, 46.5),团队提高了23.2%(17.1, 29.3)(P < 0.0001)。5个地点中有3个地点的CCF增加,电击周围暂停时间平均减少5秒(P < 0.0001)。具有统计学显著关联的特征是身高(P = 0.01)和进行心肺复苏的次数(P = 0.01)。

结论

急救团队和个体在执行HQ-CPR方面存在困难,但在作为教育干预一部分的有反馈的刻意练习后表现有所改善。只有一个常规使用实时心肺复苏反馈设备的地点达到了≥80%的HQ-CPR。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验