San Román-Mata Silvia, Darné Marc, Herrera-Pedroviejo Ernesto, Otero-Agra Martín, Navarro-Patón Rubén, Barcala-Furelos Roberto, Aranda-García Silvia
REMOSS Research Group, Faculty of Education and Sport Sciences, University of Vigo, 36005 Pontevedra, Spain.
Department of Nursing, University of Granada, 18071 Granada, Spain.
Healthcare (Basel). 2025 Jun 14;13(12):1428. doi: 10.3390/healthcare13121428.
: The present study evaluated the feasibility and quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed by a single rescuer, comparing the over-the-head (OTH) technique using mouth-to-pocket mask ventilation with bag-valve mask (BVM) ventilation. The study analyzed the chest compression (CC) quality, ventilation adequacy, interruption minimization, and the rescuers' perceived difficulty. : A randomized simulation crossover study was conducted with 26 lifeguard students trained in basic life support and both ventilation techniques. All of the participants performed two solo CPR trials (2 min each) using OTH with a pocket mask or BVM on a manikin connected to a feedback system (Little Anne QCPR, Laerdal). The overall CPR quality, ventilation, and CC quality were assessed, along with the perceived difficulty (scale 0-5). A 5 min rest was provided between the trials. : The overall CPR quality was excellent for both techniques with a median of 98% (IQR: 97-99) for BVM-OTH and 99% (IQR: 94-99) for Pocket-OTH ( = 0.31). The ventilation quality was better when using BVM-OTH (100%, IQR: 99-100) compared to that with Pocket-OTH (99%, IQR: 77-100; = 0.046). No differences were found in the CC quality (99%, IQR: 99-100; = 0.24). However, Pocket-OTH had more CCs and shorter interruption times ( ≤ 0.001). The perceived difficulty was low for both techniques. : Both techniques enable high-quality CPR when performed alone. Given that no clinically relevant differences emerged in the resuscitation quality, the OTH technique using a pocket mask offers a viable alternative, particularly in scenarios with a single rescuer and limited resources.
本研究评估了单人实施心肺复苏（CPR）的可行性和质量，比较了使用口鼻面罩通气的头上（OTH）技术与袋阀面罩（BVM）通气。该研究分析了胸外按压（CC）质量、通气充分性、中断最小化以及施救者感知到的难度。
一项随机模拟交叉研究对26名接受过基本生命支持和两种通气技术培训的救生员学生进行。所有参与者在连接反馈系统（Little Anne QCPR，Laerdal）的人体模型上使用口鼻面罩或BVM进行两次单独的CPR试验（每次2分钟）。评估了总体CPR质量、通气和CC质量，以及感知到的难度（0 - 5级）。两次试验之间提供5分钟休息时间。
两种技术的总体CPR质量都很好，BVM - OTH的中位数为98%（四分位间距：97 - 99），口鼻面罩 - OTH的中位数为99%（四分位间距：94 - 99）（P = 0.31）。与口鼻面罩 - OTH（99%，四分位间距：77 - 100；P = 0.046）相比，使用BVM - OTH时通气质量更好（100%，四分位间距：99 - 100）。CC质量没有差异（99%，四分位间距：99 - 100；P = 0.24）。然而，口鼻面罩 - OTH的胸外按压次数更多，中断时间更短（P≤0.001）。两种技术感知到的难度都较低。
两种技术单独实施时都能进行高质量的CPR。鉴于复苏质量没有出现临床相关差异，使用口鼻面罩的OTH技术提供了一种可行的替代方案，特别是在单人施救且资源有限的情况下。
