Suppr超能文献

安大略省关于院内心脏骤停和院外心脏骤停的主动按压-减压心肺复苏试验。

The Ontario trial of active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation for in-hospital and prehospital cardiac arrest.

作者信息

Stiell I G, Hébert P C, Wells G A, Laupacis A, Vandemheen K, Dreyer J F, Eisenhauer M A, Gibson J, Higginson L A, Kirby A S, Mahon J L, Maloney J P, Weitzman B N

机构信息

Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

JAMA. 1996 May 8;275(18):1417-23.

PMID:8618367
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the impact of active compression-decompression (ACD) cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and standard CPR on the outcomes of in-hospital and prehospital victims of cardiac arrest.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial with blinding of allocation using a sealed container.

SETTINGS

(1) Emergency departments, wards, and intensive care units of 5 university hospitals and (2) all locations outside hospitals in 2 midsized cities.

PATIENTS

A total of 1784 adults who had cardiac arrest.

INTERVENTION

Patients received either standard or ACD CPR throughout resuscitation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Survival for 1 hour and to hospital discharge and the modified Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).

RESULTS

All characteristics were similar in the standard and ACD CPR groups for the 773 in-hospital patients and the 1011 prehospital patients. For in-hospital patients, there were no significant differences between the standard (n = 368) and ACD (n = 405) CPR groups in survival for 1 hour (35.1% vs 34.6%; P = .89), in survival until hospital discharge (11.4% vs 10.4%; P = .64), or in the median MMSE score of survivors (37 in both groups). For patients who collapsed outside the hospital, there were also no significant differences between the standard (n = 510) and ACD (n = 501) CPR groups in survival for 1 hour (16.5% vs 18.2%; P = .48), in survival to hospital discharge (3.7% vs 4.6%; P = .49), or in the median MMSE score of survivors (35 in both groups). Exploration of clinically important subgroups failed to identify any patients who appeared to benefit from ACD CPR.

CONCLUSIONS

ACD CPR did not improve survival or neurologic outcomes in any group of patients with cardiac arrest.

摘要

目的

比较主动按压-减压(ACD)心肺复苏(CPR)与标准CPR对院内心脏骤停患者和院外心脏骤停患者结局的影响。

设计

采用密封容器进行随机分组的随机对照试验。

地点

(1)5所大学医院的急诊科、病房和重症监护病房;(2)2个中等城市的所有院外地点。

患者

共有1784例心脏骤停的成年人。

干预措施

患者在整个复苏过程中接受标准CPR或ACD CPR。

主要观察指标

复苏后1小时存活情况、出院存活率以及改良简易精神状态检查表(MMSE)。

结果

773例院内心脏骤停患者和1011例院外心脏骤停患者中,标准CPR组和ACD CPR组的所有特征均相似。对于院内心脏骤停患者,标准CPR组(n = 368)和ACD CPR组(n = 405)在复苏后1小时存活率(35.1%对34.6%;P = 0.89)、出院存活率(11.4%对10.4%;P = 0.64)或存活者的MMSE评分中位数(两组均为37分)方面均无显著差异。对于院外心脏骤停患者,标准CPR组(n = 510)和ACD CPR组(n = 501)在复苏后1小时存活率(16.5%对18.2%;P = 0.48)、出院存活率(3.7%对4.6%;P = 0.49)或存活者的MMSE评分中位数(两组均为35分)方面也无显著差异。对具有临床重要意义的亚组进行分析,未发现任何似乎从ACD CPR中获益的患者。

结论

ACD CPR未能改善任何心脏骤停患者群体的存活率或神经功能结局。

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