论文部分内容阅读
目的:观察比较徒手心肺复苏与机械心肺复苏对于心肺复苏时的效果。方法:将120例呼吸心跳骤停患者随机分为人工组和机械组,都在得到确认后5秒内开始实施心肺复苏术,其中人工组实施徒手心肺复苏术,机械组使用心肺复苏机行持续心肺复苏术。依据《2015版心肺复苏指南》实施持续心肺复苏,同时观察患者的自主呼吸、自主心率、大动脉搏动、面色、瞳孔及心电图等指标。结果:人工组有效2例,无效58例,有效率为3.33%;机械组有效10例,无效50例,有效率为16.67%,两组对比总体阳性率差异明显,有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:心肺复苏机在治疗心跳骤停患者时比徒手心肺复苏有更好的复苏效果,值得推广应用。
Objective: To observe and compare the effects of manual and mechanical CPR on cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Methods: 120 patients with respiratory arrest were randomly divided into artificial group and mechanical group. All of them were started CPR within 5 seconds after confirmation. Manual CPR was performed in artificial group and continuous CPR group in mechanical group CPR. Continuous CPR was performed according to the “2015 Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation”. At the same time, the indexes such as spontaneous breathing, spontaneous heart rate, arterial pulse, facial color, pupil and electrocardiogram were observed. Results: Two cases were effective in the artificial group, 58 cases were ineffective and the effective rate was 3.33%. In the mechanical group, 10 cases were effective and 50 cases were ineffective. The effective rate was 16.67%. There was significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.05). Conclusion: CPR is better than manual CPR in the treatment of patients with cardiac arrest, which is worth popularizing and applying.