• 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>Springer Open Choice >Comparison of Coopdech® CoPilot® Intubrite® and Macintosh laryngoscopes for tracheal intubation during pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a randomized controlled crossover simulation trial
【2h】

Comparison of Coopdech® CoPilot® Intubrite® and Macintosh laryngoscopes for tracheal intubation during pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a randomized controlled crossover simulation trial

机译：小儿心肺复苏过程中用于气管插管的Coopdech®CoPilot®Intubrite®和Macintosh喉镜的比较：一项随机对照的交叉模拟试验

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

The aim of the study was to compare the intubation times and success rates of various laryngoscopes during resuscitation in pediatric emergency intubation with uninterrupted chest compression on a standardized pediatric manikin model. This was a randomized crossover study with 107 paramedic participants. We compared times to successful intubation, intubation success rates, and glottic visibility using a Cormack–Lehane grade for Macintosh, Intubrite®, Coopdech®, and Copilot® laryngoscopes. One hundred seven paramedics (mean age 31.2 ± 7.5 years) routinely involved in the management of prehospital care participated in this study. Intubation success rates (overall effectiveness), which was the primary study endpoint, were highest for the Coopdech® and CoPilot® devices (100 %) and were lowest for Intubrite® (89.7 %, p < 0.001) and Macintosh (80.4 %, p < 0.001). The secondary study endpoint, time to first effective ventilation, was achieved fastest when using the Coopdech® laryngoscope (21.6 ± 6.2 s) and was significantly slower with all other devices (Intubrite® 25.4 ± 10.5 s, p = 0.006; CoPilot® 25.6 ± 7.4 s, p = 0.007; Macintosh 29.4 ± 8.2 s, p < 0.001).Conclusion: We conclude that in child simulations managed by paramedics, the Coopdech® and Copilot® video laryngoscopes performed better than the standard Macintosh or Intubrite® laryngoscopes for endotracheal intubation during child chest compression. frame="hsides" rules="groups" class="rendered small default_table">> rowspan="1" colspan="1"> >“What is Known”
• Pediatric intubation performed by paramedics in prehospital conditions using a laryngoscope with Miller or Macintosh blades is varied and ranges from 63.4 to 82 %.> rowspan="1" colspan="1"> >“What is New”
• This work is the first one evaluating mentioned airway devices in pediatric CPR provided by paramedics.
• The results of this work can influence choice of airway device for clinical use in pediatric CPR.
机译：这项研究的目的是在标准化的小儿人体模型上，比较不间断的胸部按压的小儿急诊插管在复苏过程中各种喉镜的插管时间和成功率。这是一项由107名护理人员参加的随机交叉研究。我们使用Macintosh，Intubrite®，Coopdech®和Copilot®喉镜的Cormack-Lehane等级，比较了成功插管的时间，插管成功率和声门可见性。常规参与院前护理管理的107名护理人员（平均年龄31.2±7.5岁）参加了本研究。插管成功率（总体有效性）是主要研究终点，对于Coopdech®和CoPilot®设备最高（100％），对于Intubrite®（89.7％，p <0.001）和Macintosh（80.4％，p <0.001）。使用Coopdech®喉镜时，次要研究终点即首次有效通气时间最快（21.6±±6.2 s），其他所有设备（Intubrite®25.4±10.5 s，p = 0.006;CoPilot®25.6± 7.4 s，p = 0.007; Macintosh 29.4±±8.2 s，p <0.001）。结论：我们得出结论，在由医护人员管理的儿童模拟中，Coopdech®和Copilot®视频喉镜的气管插管性能优于标准Macintosh或Intubrite®喉镜。 <！-table ft1-> <！-table-wrap mode =“ anchored” t5-> frame =“ hsides” rules =“ groups” class =“ rendered small default_table” > > rowspan =“ 1” colspan =“ 1”> >“已知情况”
•医护人员在住院前条件下使用带Miller的喉镜在儿科插管或Macintosh刀片不同，范围从63.4％到82％。 > rowspan =“ 1” colspan =“ 1”> >“新功能” < br />•这项工作是护理人员提供的第一个评估儿科CPR中提到的气道器械的方法。
•这项工作的结果可能会影响儿科CPR临床使用的气道器械的选择。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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