Guly U M, Mitchell R G, Cook R, Steedman D J, Robertson C E
Department of Accident, and Emergency Medicine, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh.
BMJ. 1995 Apr 29;310(6987):1091-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.310.6987.1091.
To examine the effect on survival of treatment by ambulance paramedics and ambulance technicians after cardiac arrest outside hospital.
Prospective study over two years from 1 April 1992 to 31 March 1994.
Accident and emergency department of university teaching hospital.
502 consecutive adult patients with out of hospital cardiopulmonary arrest of cardiac origin.
Treatment by ambulance technicians or paramedics both equipped with semiautomatic defibrillators.
Rate of return of spontaneous circulation, hospital admission, and survival to hospital discharge.
Rates of return of spontaneous circulation, hospital admission, and survival to hospital discharge were not significantly different for patients treated by paramedics as opposed to ambulance technicians. Paramedics spent significantly longer at the scene of the arrest than technicians (P < 0.0001).
The response of ambulance paramedics to patients with cardiopulmonary arrest outside hospital does not provide improved outcome when compared with ambulance technicians using basic techniques and equipped with semi-automatic defibrillators.
研究院外心脏骤停后由急救医护人员和急救技师进行治疗对患者生存情况的影响。
1992年4月1日至1994年3月31日为期两年的前瞻性研究。
大学教学医院的急诊科。
502例连续的院外心源心肺骤停成年患者。
由配备半自动除颤器的急救技师或急救医护人员进行治疗。
自主循环恢复率、入院率及出院生存率。
与急救技师相比,由急救医护人员治疗的患者自主循环恢复率、入院率及出院生存率无显著差异。急救医护人员在心脏骤停现场花费的时间显著长于急救技师(P<0.0001)。
与使用基本技术并配备半自动除颤器的急救技师相比,院外心脏骤停患者由急救医护人员进行急救并未改善患者预后。