Suppr超能文献

自动体外除颤器

Automated external defibrillators.

出版信息

Health Devices. 1996 Aug;25(8):271-98.

PMID:8999035
Abstract

This study is an update to our August-September 1995 Evaluation of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) in which we evaluated nine AEDs from three manufacturers. In the current issue, we evaluate three additional semiautomated AEDs from three manufacturers. (We also present update information, including new rankings, for the previously evaluated units.) We tested the new units against the same criteria and rated and ranked them using the same scheme as in our original Evaluation. Specifically, we judged the suitability of these units for two primary clinical applications: prehospital use and in-hospital use. In addition, in this Update, we rated and ranked all of the units evaluated to date for a third clinical application: public access defibrillation (PAD) use. In this Update, we briefly describe the purpose and use of AEDs in the Introduction. For more detailed information about this technology, the environments in which AEDs are used, and the factors to consider when selecting this type of device, we encourage readers to refer to our original AED Evaluation (Health Devices 24[8-9], August-September 1995). Also, because our criteria and test methods have not changed since the original study, we have not repeated them in this issue. Again, readers should refer to the previous Evaluation for this information. Furthermore, as described in the inset on page 272, the format of this Update differs from that of traditional Health Devices Evaluations. Most notably, all of the characteristics, test results, and ratings for each unit are presented in an individual Product Profile. Following the profiles for the three units, we present a comprehensive Conclusions section, detailing how the newly evaluated units compare with those evaluated in our original study.

摘要

本研究是我们1995年8月至9月对自动体外除颤器(AED)评估的更新内容,当时我们评估了来自三个制造商的九款AED。在本期中,我们评估了来自三个制造商的另外三款半自动AED。(我们还提供了更新信息,包括对之前评估设备的新排名。)我们根据相同的标准对新设备进行测试,并使用与我们最初评估相同的方案对其进行评级和排名。具体而言,我们判断这些设备对于两个主要临床应用的适用性:院前使用和院内使用。此外,在本次更新中,我们对迄今为止评估的所有设备在第三个临床应用:公众可获取除颤(PAD)使用方面进行了评级和排名。在本次更新中,我们在引言部分简要描述了AED的目的和用途。有关该技术、AED使用的环境以及选择此类设备时应考虑的因素的更详细信息,我们鼓励读者参考我们最初的AED评估(《健康设备》24[8 - 9],1995年8月至9月)。另外,由于自最初研究以来我们的标准和测试方法没有改变,我们在本期中未重复这些内容。同样,读者应参考之前的评估获取此信息。此外,如第272页插图中所述,本次更新的格式与传统的《健康设备评估》不同。最显著的是,每个设备的所有特征、测试结果和评级都在单独的产品简介中呈现。在这三款设备的简介之后,我们给出了一个全面的结论部分,详细说明了新评估的设备与我们最初研究中评估的设备相比情况如何。

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