Suppr超能文献

一项关于用于气道异物阻塞的基于吸引的气道清除装置的系统评价。

A systematic review on suction-based airway clearance devices for foreign body airway obstruction.

作者信息

Paludi Miguel Angel, Palermo Natalino, Limonti Francesco, Semeraro Angelica, Ermanno Daniele, Ganzino Sandro, Ramacciati Nicola

机构信息

Head Nurse, Pneumology Unit, ASP Cosenza, 87100 Cosenza, Italy.

Nurse, Distretto Sanitario Territoriale Valle Crati, ASP Cosenza, 87100, Cosenza, Italy.

出版信息

Int Emerg Nurs. 2025 Mar;79:101575. doi: 10.1016/j.ienj.2025.101575. Epub 2025 Jan 29.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review is to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness and safety of negative pressure, anti-choking devices (ACDs) in managing severe foreign body airway obstructions (FBAO) compared to traditional techniques such as the Heimlich maneuver.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted in major databases to identify studies published within the past five years. Eligible studies were appraised for quality using the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction Tool. Data on study design, outcomes, and safety parameters were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

The review identified studies evaluating various ACDs, including LifeVac and DeChoker, in different settings and populations. Results from retrospective studies and trials on mannequins or cadavers suggested promising outcomes for ACDs in relieving FBAO, with success rates ranging from 71% to 99%. However, concerns regarding usability, training, and adverse events were raised, emphasizing the need for further research.

CONCLUSIONS

Review emphasizes traditional maneuvers (thrusts/blows) for all rescuers. ACDs show promise, but further research is needed to determine their role alongside established methods. LifeVac's design may offer advantages in terms of ease of use, potentially requiring less dexterity compared to Dechoker. Regardless of the device, proper training remains crucial for optimal effectiveness and safe use. Combining ACDs with traditional methods like abdominal thrusts and back blows may be a promising approach for improving airway obstruction management.

摘要

目的

本系统评价的目的是全面评估负压防窒息装置(ACD)与海姆立克急救法等传统技术相比,在处理严重异物气道梗阻(FBAO)时的有效性和安全性。

方法

在主要数据库中进行了全面的文献检索,以识别过去五年内发表的研究。使用关键评价和数据提取工具对符合条件的研究进行质量评估。提取并分析了有关研究设计、结果和安全参数的数据。

结果

该评价确定了在不同环境和人群中评估各种ACD(包括LifeVac和DeChoker)的研究。回顾性研究以及在人体模型或尸体上进行的试验结果表明,ACD在缓解FBAO方面有良好前景,成功率在71%至99%之间。然而,人们对其可用性、培训和不良事件提出了担忧,强调需要进一步研究。

结论

评价强调所有救援人员应采用传统手法(推/拍)。ACD显示出前景,但需要进一步研究以确定它们与既定方法相比的作用。LifeVac的设计在易用性方面可能具有优势,与Dechoker相比可能需要的灵活性较低。无论使用何种装置,适当的培训对于实现最佳效果和安全使用仍然至关重要。将ACD与腹部按压和背部拍打等传统方法相结合,可能是改善气道梗阻处理的一种有前景的方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验