Suppr超能文献

手术室中的心脏骤停:我们的高级心血管生命支持技能如何?

Cardiac arrest in the OR: how are our ACLS skills?

作者信息

Kurrek M M, Devitt J H, Cohen M

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesia, Sunnybrook Health Science Centre, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

Can J Anaesth. 1998 Feb;45(2):130-2. doi: 10.1007/BF03013250.

Abstract

PURPOSE

While advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) training is widely available, it is not mandatory for all anaesthetists. We hypothesised that adherence to ACLS guidelines during resuscitation of ventricular fibrillation (VFib) as assessed in a simulator environment would be poor by anaesthetists not trained in ACLS compared with those who had received training.

METHODS

With approval by the ethics review board, 89 subjects participated in the study. The simulation system consisted of a computer controlled mannequin with lifelike qualities set in a mock operating room. Each subject was given a test scenario that contained several standard anaesthetic problems. A VFib cardiac arrest occurred after approximately one hour into the simulation. A perfect score (score = A) defined complete compliance with the ACLS guidelines, whereas minor deviations (score = B) included changes in energy levels, drug doses or treatment order. The failure to discontinue the anaesthetic, defibrillate or administer epinephrine were considered major deviations (score = C).

RESULTS

Eight subjects followed the ACLS guidelines (9%, score = A), while 27 subjects showed minor (30%, score = B) and 54 subjects major deviations (61%, score = C). Sixty-two of the 89 participants (70%) had taken the ACLS course and achieved higher scores than did anaesthetists without such training (P < 0.05). Forty-two participants (47%) did not discontinue the anaesthetic, 10 (11%) never gave epinephrine and 5 (6%) never used the defibrillator.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to ACLS guidelines was poor. A greater proportion of subjects without previous ACLS training had deviations from protocol than did subjects who had received training. We need to consider ways to ensure that anaesthetists obtain and retain resuscitation skills according to ACLS guidelines.

摘要

目的

虽然高级心脏生命支持(ACLS)培训广泛可得,但并非所有麻醉医生都必须接受。我们假设,在模拟环境中评估心室颤动(VFib)复苏期间,未接受ACLS培训的麻醉医生与接受过培训的麻醉医生相比,对ACLS指南的遵循情况会较差。

方法

经伦理审查委员会批准,89名受试者参与了该研究。模拟系统由一台置于模拟手术室的具有逼真特质的计算机控制人体模型组成。每个受试者都被给予一个包含若干标准麻醉问题的测试场景。模拟进行约一小时后发生VFib心脏骤停。满分(分数 = A)定义为完全符合ACLS指南,而轻微偏差(分数 = B)包括能量水平、药物剂量或治疗顺序的改变。未停止麻醉、未进行除颤或未给予肾上腺素被视为严重偏差(分数 = C)。

结果

8名受试者遵循了ACLS指南(9%,分数 = A),27名受试者有轻微偏差(30%,分数 = B),54名受试者有严重偏差(61%,分数 = C)。89名参与者中有62名(70%)参加了ACLS课程,其得分高于未接受此类培训的麻醉医生(P < 0.05)。42名参与者(47%)未停止麻醉,10名(11%)从未给予肾上腺素,5名(6%)从未使用除颤器。

结论

对ACLS指南的遵循情况较差。与接受过培训的受试者相比,之前未接受ACLS培训的受试者中偏离方案的比例更高。我们需要考虑如何确保麻醉医生根据ACLS指南获得并保持复苏技能。

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