Department of Pediatrics Universidade Federal da Fronteira Sul Passo Fundo Brazil.
Department of Pediatrics Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Porto Alegre Brazil.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Oct 19;10(20):e018050. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.120.018050. Epub 2021 Oct 6.
Background To compare the 2-finger and 2-thumb chest compression techniques on infant manikins in an out-of-hospital setting regarding efficiency of compressions, ventilation, and rescuer pain and fatigue. Methods and Results In a randomized crossover design, 78 medical students performed 2 minutes of cardiopulmonary resuscitation with mouth-to-nose ventilation at a 30:2 rate on a Resusci Baby QCPR infant manikin (Laerdal, Stavanger, Norway), using a barrier device and the 2-finger and 2-thumb compression techniques. Frequency and depth of chest compressions, proper hand position, complete chest recoil at each compression, hands-off time, tidal volume, and number of ventilations were evaluated through manikin-embedded SkillReporting software. After the interventions, standard Likert questionnaires and analog scales for pain and fatigue were applied. The variables were compared by a paired -test or Wilcoxon test as suitable. Seventy-eight students participated in the study and performed 156 complete interventions. The 2-thumb technique resulted in a greater depth of chest compressions (42 versus 39.7 mm; <0.01), and a higher percentage of chest compressions with adequate depth (89.5% versus 77%; <0.01). There were no differences in ventilatory parameters or hands-off time between techniques. Pain and fatigue scores were higher for the 2-finger technique (5.2 versus 1.8 and 3.8 versus 2.6, respectively; <0.01). Conclusions In a simulation of out-of-hospital, single-rescuer infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation, the 2-thumb technique achieves better quality of chest compressions without interfering with ventilation and causes less rescuer pain and fatigue.
在院外环境中,比较 2 指和 2 指拇胸外按压技术在婴儿模型上的效果,包括按压效率、通气效果、抢救者疼痛和疲劳程度。
采用随机交叉设计,78 名医学生在 Resusci Baby QCPR 婴儿模型(挪威拉得拉尔公司)上使用屏障设备和 2 指和 2 指拇按压技术,以 30:2 的比例进行 2 分钟的心肺复苏和口对口通气。通过嵌入在模型中的 SkillReporting 软件评估按压频率和深度、手部正确位置、每次按压时胸廓完全回弹、手离开时间、潮气量和通气次数。干预后,使用标准的 Likert 问卷和疼痛及疲劳模拟量表进行评估。使用配对 t 检验或 Wilcoxon 检验比较变量。78 名学生参与了本研究,共完成了 156 次完整干预。2 指拇技术可使按压深度更大(42 毫米比 39.7 毫米;<0.01),且深度足够的按压比例更高(89.5%比 77%;<0.01)。两种技术的通气参数和手离开时间无差异。2 指技术的疼痛和疲劳评分更高(5.2 比 1.8,3.8 比 2.6;<0.01)。
在院外、单人抢救婴儿心肺复苏模拟中,2 指拇技术可实现更好的胸廓按压质量,而不影响通气效果,且引起的抢救者疼痛和疲劳程度更低。