Suppr超能文献

心肺复苏实施的最佳表面:一项更新的系统评价与荟萃分析。

The optimal surface for delivery of CPR: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Dewan Maya, Schachna Ethan, Eastwood Kathryn, Perkins Gavin, Bray Janet

机构信息

Department of Pediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States.

Division of Critical Care Medicine, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, United States.

出版信息

Resusc Plus. 2024 Jul 20;19:100718. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100718. eCollection 2024 Sep.

Abstract

AIM

To determine the effect of CPR delivery surface (e.g. firm mattress, floor, backboard) on patient outcomes and CPR delivery.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies published since 2019 that evaluated the effect of CPR delivery surface in adults and children on patient outcomes and CPR depth (PROSPERO CRD42023467583). We included manikin studies due to a lack of human studies. We identified pre-2019 studies from the 2020 ILCOR evaluation of this topic. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full-text papers, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Evidence certainty for each outcome was evaluated using GRADE methodology. Where appropriate, we pooled data in a meta-analysis, using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Database searches identified 489 citations. We included six studies published since 2019. We analysed these studies together with the eleven studies included in the previous ILCOR review. All included studies were manikin randomised controlled trials. Certainty of evidence was low. Interventions including placing the patient on the floor or the use of backboard had minimal impact on achieving greater compression depth. Meta-analyses of floor versus firm hospital mattress or firm home mattress found a mean difference of 5.36 mm (95% CI -1.59 to 12.32) and 2.11 mm (95% CI -3.23 to 7.45) respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of a backboard led to a small 2 mm increase in chest compression depth in meta-analysis of multiple mannikin trials. Use of a firm mattress or transitioning to the floor did not affect chest compression depth.

摘要

目的

确定心肺复苏实施表面(如硬床垫、地面、背板)对患者结局和心肺复苏实施的影响。

方法

我们检索了MEDLINE、Embase、科学网和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库,查找自2019年以来发表的评估成人和儿童心肺复苏实施表面对患者结局和心肺复苏深度影响的研究(PROSPERO CRD42023467583)。由于缺乏人体研究,我们纳入了人体模型研究。我们从2020年国际复苏联合会(ILCOR)对该主题的评估中识别出2019年之前的研究。两名评审员独立筛选标题/摘要和全文论文,提取数据并评估偏倚风险。使用GRADE方法评估每个结局的证据确定性。在适当情况下,我们使用随机效应模型将数据合并进行荟萃分析。

结果

数据库检索共识别出489条引文。我们纳入了自2019年以来发表的6项研究。我们将这些研究与之前ILCOR综述中纳入的11项研究一起进行分析。所有纳入研究均为人体模型随机对照试验。证据确定性较低。包括将患者放置在地面或使用背板在内的干预措施对实现更大的按压深度影响极小。对地面与医院硬床垫或家庭硬床垫的荟萃分析发现,平均差异分别为5.36毫米(95%可信区间-1.59至12.32)和2.11毫米(95%可信区间-3.23至7.45)。

结论

在多项人体模型试验的荟萃分析中,使用背板使胸外按压深度小幅增加了2毫米。使用硬床垫或转移到地面并不影响胸外按压深度。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/50fa/11325767/f371266b6817/gr1.jpg

相似文献

9
Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest.心脏骤停时机械胸外按压与徒手胸外按压的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Aug 20;8(8):CD007260. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007260.pub4.

本文引用的文献

2
Backboard use during cardiopulmonary resuscitation and chest compression quality.心肺复苏期间使用背板与胸外按压质量
Eur J Emerg Med. 2022 Oct 1;29(5):386-387. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000916. Epub 2022 Feb 21.
8
European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Basic Life Support.《2021年欧洲复苏委员会指南:基础生命支持》
Resuscitation. 2021 Apr;161:98-114. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.02.009. Epub 2021 Mar 24.

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