Research Group MS&SPORT, Faculty of Sports Sciences, University of Murcia, 30720 Murcia, Spain.
Porto Biomechanics Laboratory, University of Porto, 4200-450 Porto, Portugal.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Sep 18;18(18):9843. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18189843.
Survival outcomes increase significantly when cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is provided correctly, but rescuers' fatigue can compromise its delivery. We investigated the effect of two exercise modes on CPR effectiveness and physiological outputs. After 4 min baseline conditions, 30 lifeguards randomly performed a 100 m run and a combined water rescue before 4 min CPR (using an adult manikin and a 30:2 compression-ventilation ratio). Physiological variables were continuously measured during baseline and CPR using a portable gas analyzer (K4b, Cosmed, Rome, Italy) and CPR effectiveness was analyzed using two HD video cameras. Higher oxygen uptake (23.0 ± 9.9 and 20.6 ± 9.1 vs. 13.5 ± 6.2 mL·kg·min) and heart rate (137 ± 19 and 133 ± 15 vs. 114 ± 15 bpm), and lower compression efficacy (63.3 ± 29.5 and 62.2 ± 28.3 vs. 69.2 ± 28.0%), were found for CPRrun and CPRswim compared to CPRbase. In addition, ventilation efficacy was higher in the rescues preceded by intense exercise than in CPRbase (49.5 ± 42.3 and 51.9 ± 41.0 vs. 33.5 ± 38.3%), but no differences were detected between CPRrun and CPRswim. In conclusion, CPRrun and CPRswim protocols induced a relevant physiological stress over each min and in the overall CPR compared with CPRbase. The CPRun protocol reduces the compression rate but has a higher effectiveness percentage than the CPRswim protocol, in which there is a considerably higher compression rate but with less efficacy.
当心肺复苏(CPR)正确实施时,患者的生存率会显著提高,但救援人员的疲劳会影响 CPR 的实施。我们研究了两种运动模式对 CPR 效果和生理输出的影响。在 4 分钟的基础条件后,30 名救生员随机进行了 100 米跑步和综合水上救援,然后进行了 4 分钟的 CPR(使用成人人体模型和 30:2 的按压通气比)。在基础条件和 CPR 期间,使用便携式气体分析仪(K4b,Cosmed,罗马,意大利)连续测量生理变量,并使用两个高清摄像机分析 CPR 效果。与 CPRbase 相比,CPRrun 和 CPRswim 时的耗氧量(23.0±9.9 和 20.6±9.1 与 13.5±6.2 mL·kg·min)和心率(137±19 和 133±15 与 114±15 bpm)更高,压缩效果更差(63.3±29.5 和 62.2±28.3 与 69.2±28.0%)。此外,与 CPRbase 相比,在剧烈运动之前进行的救援中通气效果更高(49.5±42.3 和 51.9±41.0 与 33.5±38.3%),但 CPRrun 和 CPRswim 之间没有差异。总之,与 CPRbase 相比,CPRrun 和 CPRswim 方案在每一分钟和整个 CPR 过程中都会引起明显的生理应激。CPRun 方案降低了按压频率,但效果百分比高于 CPRswim 方案,后者的按压频率较高,但效果较差。