心脏停搏患者应用便携式胸腔按压机复苏效果观察

目的:探讨MCC便携式心肺复苏机对心脏停搏患者进行心肺复苏的效果.方法:选择2011年5月~2012年4月25例心脏停搏患者进抢救室后遵医嘱应用便携式心肺复苏机实施心脏胸外按压,代替人工手动按压,进行复苏抢救.同比2010年5月~2011年4月急诊抢救心脏停傅患者22例,采用传统徒手心肺复苏,做为对照组.MCC便携式心肺复苏机按压频率100次/min,按压深度范围为38mm-50mm.传统徒手心肺复苏按心肺复苏原则操作.统计复苏成功率.结果:两组病例在性别、年龄、心脏停搏时间及病因等方面无统计学差异.患者经过机械心肺复苏,成功7例(28%),MCC便携式心肺复苏机成功率明显提高传统徒手心肺复苏.在MCC组没有一例肋骨骨折.结论:跟徒手心肺复苏相比MCC便携式心肺复苏机是安全的,有效的,它提供了一个新的CPR选择.

Clinical Use of Mini Chest Compressor for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

Objective: To investigate that MCC is safe and equally as effective for CPR when compared with conventional manual chest compression.Methods: This is a retrospective study comparing the effectiveness of MCC between 2 separate cohorts of patients.From May 2011-April 2012,MCC was used in all out of hospital cardiac arrest patients brought to our emergency room except those who were 18 years old and under and patients of trauma and terminal stage diseases.A total of 25 patients were included.A total of 22 patients with similar conditions received conventional manual chest compression from May 2010-April 2011 that were included as the control group.MCC device was used with a fixed compression rate of 100/min and compression depth between 3.8 and 5 cm.Manual chest compression was performed based on the current CPR guidelines.Current Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support(ACLS) guideline procedures were followed in all patients.The protocol was continued until successful resuscitation or for a total of 30 mins.Successful resuscitation was defined as return of spontaneous circulation with blood pressure >90/60 mmHg for more than 30 mins.Results: Mean age,gender and duration from CA to CPR did not differ significantly between MCC and manual groups.The success of resuscitation was numerically greater in MCC group when compared with the manual group(Table).There was no single incidence of rib fracture in MCC group.Conclusion: MCC is safe and at least equally as effective as manual chest compression.It may,therefore,provide a new option for CPR.