• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Comparison of Pentax-AWS Airwayscope and Glidescope for Infant Tracheal Intubation by Anesthesiologists during Cardiopulmonary Arrest Simulation: A Randomized Crossover Trial
【2h】

Comparison of Pentax-AWS Airwayscope and Glidescope for Infant Tracheal Intubation by Anesthesiologists during Cardiopulmonary Arrest Simulation: A Randomized Crossover Trial

机译：麻醉医师在心肺骤停模拟期间对宾得-AWS气管镜和滑行镜进行婴儿气管插管的比较：一项随机交叉试验

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background. Recent guidelines for infant cardiopulmonary resuscitation emphasize that all rescuers should minimize interruption of chest compressions, even for endotracheal intubation. We compared the utility of the Pentax-AWS Airwayscope (AWS) with the Glidescope (GS) during chest compressions on an infant manikin. Methods. Twenty-four anesthesiologists with more than two years of experience performed tracheal intubation on an infant manikin using the AWS and GS, with or without chest compressions. Results. In GS trials, none of the participants failed without compressions, while three failed with compressions. In AWS trials, all participants succeeded regardless of chest compressions. Intubation time was significantly longer with chest compressions with the GS (P < 0.05), but not with the AWS. Difficulty of operation on a visual analog scale (VAS) for laryngoscopy did not increase significantly with chest compressions with either the GS or the AWS, while the VAS for tube passage through the glottis increased with compressions with the GS, but not with the AWS. Conclusion. We conclude that in infant simulations managed by anesthesiologists, the AWS performed better than the GS for endotracheal intubation with chest compressions.
机译：背景。婴儿心肺复苏的最新指南强调，即使是气管插管，所有急救人员也应尽量减少胸部按压的中断。我们比较了婴儿假人胸部按压期间宾得AWS气道镜（AWS）和滑行镜（GS）的效用。方法。拥有超过两年经验的二十四位麻醉医师使用AWS和GS在有或没有胸部按压的情况下对婴儿人体模型进行气管插管。结果。在GS试验中，没有参与者在没有按压的情况下失败，而三名参与者在按压的情况下失败。在AWS试验中，无论胸部受压如何，所有参与者均成功。 GS胸部按压的插管时间明显更长（P <0.05），而AWS则没有。使用GS或AWS进行胸外按压时，喉镜检查的视觉模拟量表（VAS）的操作难度没有显着增加，而使用GS进行按压时，通过声门的导管的VAS随GS进行按压而增加，但对于AWS不增加。结论。我们得出的结论是，在由麻醉师管理的婴儿模拟中，AWS在气管插管配合胸部按压时的表现优于GS。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号