Department of Emergency Medicine, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Am J Emerg Med. 2022 Apr;54:65-70. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2022.01.051. Epub 2022 Jan 30.
This study aimed to investigate the effect of resuscitation guideline terminology on pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performance.
This was a prospective randomised crossover simulation trial. A total of 32 medical doctors conducted 2-min single-rescuer CPR using the one-handed chest compression technique (OHCC) or two-handed chest compression technique (THCC) on a pediatric manikin. The participants conducted chest compressions according to the chest compression depth (CCD) target of '5 cm (Test 1)' or 'at least one third of the anterior-posterior dimension of the chest (Test 2)' in a random order.
In both techniques (OHCC or THCC), the average CCD of Test 1 were significantly lower than those of Test 2 (OHCC: 50.0 mm [46.0-52.0 mm] in Test 1 vs. 52.0 mm [50.3-55.0 mm] in Test 2, P = 0.001; THCC: 52.0 mm [50.3-55.0 mm] in Test 1 vs. 58.0 mm [54.0-62.0 mm] in Test 2, P < 0.001). The adequacy of the chest compressions was also superior in Test 2 (OHCC: 63.0% [7.5-95.8%] in Test 1 vs. 96.5% [78.8-99.9%] in Test 2, P < 0.001; THCC: 96.5% [78.8-99.9%] in Test 1 vs. 100.0% [100.0-100.0%] in Test 2, P < 0.001). Ventilation parameters were not significantly different between Tests 1 and 2.
Average CCD during simulated pediatric CPR according to the CCD target of '5 cm' was significantly lower than those according to the CCD target of 'at least one third of the anterior-posterior dimension of the chest'.
本研究旨在探讨复苏指南术语对儿科心肺复苏(CPR)效果的影响。
这是一项前瞻性随机交叉模拟试验。32 名医生使用单手胸外按压技术(OHCC)或双手胸外按压技术(THCC)对小儿模型进行 2 分钟单人 CPR。参与者按照“5cm(测试 1)”或“至少三分之一胸廓前后径(测试 2)”的按压深度(CCD)目标,以随机顺序进行按压。
在两种技术(OHCC 或 THCC)中,测试 1 的平均 CCD 明显低于测试 2(OHCC:测试 1 为 50.0mm[46.0-52.0mm],测试 2 为 52.0mm[50.3-55.0mm],P=0.001;THCC:测试 1 为 52.0mm[50.3-55.0mm],测试 2 为 58.0mm[54.0-62.0mm],P<0.001)。测试 2 的按压充分性也更好(OHCC:测试 1 为 63.0%[7.5-95.8%],测试 2 为 96.5%[78.8-99.9%],P<0.001;THCC:测试 1 为 96.5%[78.8-99.9%],测试 2 为 100.0%[100.0-100.0%],P<0.001)。测试 1 和测试 2 之间的通气参数无显著差异。
根据“5cm”的 CCD 目标进行模拟儿科 CPR 时,平均 CCD 明显低于根据“至少三分之一胸廓前后径”的 CCD 目标。