回顾分析Lucas2心肺复苏仪对急诊心肺复苏的临床效果
|
摘要
目的:比较急诊科Lucas2心肺复苏仪器与徒手方式实施心肺复苏的临床效果。方法:回顾需要行心肺复苏治疗的患者72例,其中对照组(n=42)采用徒手心肺复苏法,观察组(n=30)采用Lucas2心肺复苏仪器,分析比较两组临床效果。结果:主循环恢复(ROSC)、CPR成功率、存活率观察组分别为20.0%、10%、6.7%,对照组分别为11.9%、4.8%、2.4%,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组自主心跳、循环、呼吸及血压恢复时间均明显短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:相较于徒手心肺复苏,Lucas2心肺复苏仪器心肺复苏效果更好且成功率更高,更值得推广。
Objective To compare the clinical effect of cardiopulmonary resuscitation with Lucas2 cardiopulmonary resuscitation instrument and unarmed approach. Method Retrospectively were treated in the Emergency Department required cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the treatment of 72 cases of which manual CPR was used,the control group( n = 42) was treated with cardiopulmonary resuscitation,and the observation group( n = 30) was treated with Lucas2 cardiopulmonary resuscitation instrument,analysis and comparison of clinical effect of the two group. Results The recovery rate of spontaneous circulation in the observation group was 20. 0%,the success rate of CPR was 10%,the survival rate was 6. 7%,comparison of the control group( 11. 9%,4. 8% and 2. 4%) there was no significant difference( P > 0. 05). The time of recovery,circulation,respiration and blood pressure recovery in the observation group were significantly shorter than those in the control group( P < 0. 05). Conclusion Lucas2 cardiopulmonary resuscitation is better and more successful than cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
Objective To compare the clinical effect of cardiopulmonary resuscitation with Lucas2 cardiopulmonary resuscitation instrument and unarmed approach. Method Retrospectively were treated in the Emergency Department required cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the treatment of 72 cases of which manual CPR was used,the control group( n = 42) was treated with cardiopulmonary resuscitation,and the observation group( n = 30) was treated with Lucas2 cardiopulmonary resuscitation instrument,analysis and comparison of clinical effect of the two group. Results The recovery rate of spontaneous circulation in the observation group was 20. 0%,the success rate of CPR was 10%,the survival rate was 6. 7%,comparison of the control group( 11. 9%,4. 8% and 2. 4%) there was no significant difference( P > 0. 05). The time of recovery,circulation,respiration and blood pressure recovery in the observation group were significantly shorter than those in the control group( P < 0. 05). Conclusion Lucas2 cardiopulmonary resuscitation is better and more successful than cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
引文
[1]孙立群,孙伏喜,周游,等.微型胸外按压机对院内心肺复苏过程中血流动力学的影响[J].实用医学杂志,2015,31(23):3880.
[2]Idris AH,Becker LB,Ornato JP,et al.Utstein-style guidelines for uniform reporting of laboratory CPR research.A statement for healthcare professionals from a Task Force of the American Heart Association,the American College of Emergency Physicians,the American College of Cardiology,the European Resuscitation Council,the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada,the Institute of Critical Care Medicine,the Safar Center for Resuscitation Research,and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine[J].Resuscitation,1996,33(1):69.
[3]唐子人,赵粜,唐万春.2015美国心脏协会心肺复苏指南更新的解读[J].中华急诊医学杂志,2016,25(1):3.
[4]Hansen C M,Wissenberg M,Weeke P,et al.Automated external defibrillators inaccessible to more than half of nearby cardiac arrests in public locations during evening,nighttime,and weekends[J].Circulation,2013,128(20):2224.
[5]李文升,何树发,唐雄修,等.“萨勃”Thumper-1007型心肺复苏器的临床应用[J].中国医师杂志,2014,(z1):76.
[6]唐从耀,黄欣,张晓瑜,等.心肺复苏方式的临床效果对比分析[J].实用医学杂志,2013,29(12):2000.
[7]Robertson C,Holmberg S.Compression techniques and blood flow during cardiopulmonary resuscitation:A statement for the Advanced Life Support Working Party of the European Resuscitation Council[J].Resuscitation,1992,24(2):123.
[8]陆远强,潘建,章复萍.心肺复苏技术社区培训效果和相关影响因素研究[J].中华危重症医学杂志(电子版),2013,6(2):67.
[2]Idris AH,Becker LB,Ornato JP,et al.Utstein-style guidelines for uniform reporting of laboratory CPR research.A statement for healthcare professionals from a Task Force of the American Heart Association,the American College of Emergency Physicians,the American College of Cardiology,the European Resuscitation Council,the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada,the Institute of Critical Care Medicine,the Safar Center for Resuscitation Research,and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine[J].Resuscitation,1996,33(1):69.
[3]唐子人,赵粜,唐万春.2015美国心脏协会心肺复苏指南更新的解读[J].中华急诊医学杂志,2016,25(1):3.
[4]Hansen C M,Wissenberg M,Weeke P,et al.Automated external defibrillators inaccessible to more than half of nearby cardiac arrests in public locations during evening,nighttime,and weekends[J].Circulation,2013,128(20):2224.
[5]李文升,何树发,唐雄修,等.“萨勃”Thumper-1007型心肺复苏器的临床应用[J].中国医师杂志,2014,(z1):76.
[6]唐从耀,黄欣,张晓瑜,等.心肺复苏方式的临床效果对比分析[J].实用医学杂志,2013,29(12):2000.
[7]Robertson C,Holmberg S.Compression techniques and blood flow during cardiopulmonary resuscitation:A statement for the Advanced Life Support Working Party of the European Resuscitation Council[J].Resuscitation,1992,24(2):123.
[8]陆远强,潘建,章复萍.心肺复苏技术社区培训效果和相关影响因素研究[J].中华危重症医学杂志(电子版),2013,6(2):67.