Part 7: CPR Techniques and Devices 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care
Part 7: CPR Techniques and Devices 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care
复制标题
DOI：
10.1161/circulationaha.110.970970
复制
发表时间：
2010-11-02
期刊：
影响因子：
37.8
通讯作者：
Hazinski, Mary Fran
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cave, Diana M.;Gazmuri, Raul J.;Hazinski, Mary Fran
在过去的25年中，已经开发了各种替代传统手动CPR的方法，以努力在心脏骤停复苏期间增强灌注并提高存活率。与传统的CPR相比，这些技术和设备通常需要更多的人员，培训和设备，或者它们适用于特定的环境。这些设备的应用有可能延迟或中断CPR，因此救援人员应接受培训，以尽量减少胸外按压或除颤的任何中断，并应根据需要进行重新培训。已报告了某些技术和器械在选定环境和患者条件下的有效性;然而，常规使用的替代技术或器械在院外基本生命支持方面始终上级传统CPR。在本节中，当获益或损害证据不足时，特别是当人体数据极其有限时，不提出任何类别的建议。对于那些被指定为2005年推荐类别而非不确定类别的器械，在可能的情况下，使用贯穿本文件的相同标准指定推荐类别（参见第1部分：“执行摘要”和第2部分：“证据评价”）。无论何时使用这些器械，供应商都应监测受益与损害的证据。专家们知道下面列出的几项正在进行和/或最近结束的器械临床试验，因此鼓励读者监测同行评审期刊和AHA科学咨询声明中发表的其他试验结果。
Over the past 25 years a variety of alternatives to conventional manual CPR have been developed in an effort to enhance perfusion during attempted resuscitation from cardiac arrest and to improve survival. Compared with conventional CPR, these techniques and devices typically require more personnel, training, and equipment, or they apply to a specific setting. Application of these devices has the potential to delay or interrupt CPR, so rescuers should be trained to minimize any interruption of chest compressions or defibrillation and should be retrained as needed. Efficacy for some techniques and devices has been reported in selected settings and patient conditions; however, no alternative technique or device in routine use has consistently been shown to be superior to conventional CPR for out-of-hospital basic life support. In this section, no class of recommendation is made when there is insufficient evidence of benefit or harm, particularly if human data are extremely limited. For those devices assigned a 2005 Class of Recommendation other than Indeterminate, Classes of Recommendation were assigned when possible using the same criteria applied throughout this document (see Part 1:“Executive Summary” and Part 2:“Evidence Evaluation”).Whenever these devices are used, providers should monitor for evidence of benefit versus harm. The experts are aware of several clinical trials of the devices listed below that are under way and/or recently concluded, so readers are encouraged to monitor for the publication of additional trial results in peer-reviewed journals and AHA scientific advisory statements.