传统培训和标准视频培训在心肺复苏中的质量效果比较  

Comparison of the effect of chest compression quality between the traditional training and the standard video training

作　　者：张晖[1] 徐军[1] 朱华栋[1] 王江山[1] 韩雪 范园春 于学忠[1] Zhang Hui;Xu Jun;Zhu Huadong;Wang Jiangshan;Han Xue;Fan Yuanchun;Yu Xuezhong(Emergency Department, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beij＇ing 100730, China;Emergency Department, Luhe Hospital, Beo＇ing 101149, Chin;Emergency Department, Shunyi District Hospital, Beo＇ing 101300, China)

机构地区：[1]北京协和医院急诊科,北京100730 [2]北京潞河医院,北京101149 [3]北京顺义区医院,北京101300

出　　处：《中华急诊医学杂志》2018年第6期699-701,共3页Chinese Journal of Emergency Medicine

基　　金：国家卫生和计划生育委员会公益行业基金（201502019）

摘　　要：目的观察传统培训方法和使用标准视频培训方法对胸外按压培训效果的比较。方法采用对照研究方法，197名研究生分为传统培训和视频培训两组，分别培训2h后即刻利用高级复苏模型进行模拟复苏2min，使用心肺复苏反馈系统（背对电脑显示器）记录复苏中物理性质量指标，观察并记录每位操作者胸外心脏按压平均速率（次／min）、平均深度（cm）、胸廓回弹速率（chest compression release velocity,CCRV）（mm/s）并进行数据统计分析。结果两组的按压深度分别为（5．42±0．07）cm vs．（5．33±0．08）cm。按压频率分别为（115±1．034）次／min坩．（113．6±1．152）次／min；第二分钟回弹速率分别为（403．9±7．22）mm／s vs．（384．5±8．48）mm／s，差异无统计学意义。第一分钟回弹速率分别为（439．7±7．72）mm／s vs．（417.3±7．64）mm／s，传统培训组优于视频培训组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论使用标准视频培训与传统培训相比在在心肺复苏按压质量方面效果差异无统计学意义。Objective To observe the difference in the effect of chest compression quality between the traditional training （TT） and the standard video training （SVT）. Methods A total of 197 graduate students were divided into two groups according to the different training methods： group A （traditional modality, n=98） and group B （video training modality, n=99）. After training for 2 hours, all trainees were asked to practice CPR on a resuscitation manikin for 2 minutes under the monitoring of CPR quality by a feedback system with trainee＇s back towards compute monitor. The data of chest compression rate （times/min）, average depth （cm） and chest compression release velocity （CCRV, mm/ s） were collected and analyzed. Results Compared with TT, the mean compression depth in SVT was （5.42 ± 0.07） cm vs. （5.33 ± 0.08） cm; the effective rate of CPR in SVT was （ 115 ± 1.034） /min vs. （ 113.6 ± 1.152） times/min; the mean CCRV in SVT was （439.7 ± 7.72） mm/s vs. （417.3 ± 7.64） mm/s in the first minute （P〈0.05） and （403.9 ± 7.22） vs. （384.5 ± 8.48） mrn/s in the second minute （P〉0.05）. Conclusions There were no significant differences on improving the quality of CPR between the two groups. The video training showed no significant effectivity on improving the quality of CPR compared with the traditional way.

关 键 词：心肺复苏 质量监测 培训 

分 类 号：R459.7[医药卫生—急诊医学]