心肺复苏机与徒手心肺复苏在心脏骤停抢救中疗效的研究

Machine and Manual Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Cardiac Arrest Rescue Effect Study

目的对比心肺复苏机及徒手心肺复苏在心脏骤停抢救中的疗效,探讨心肺复苏机在心脏骤停时的抢救意义。方法整群选取2015年1月—2016年2月收治的46例心肺复苏后患者资料,其中22例采用心肺复苏机予以心肺复苏,为研究组;其余24例采用徒手心肺复苏,为对照组。回顾性分析、比较两组患者平均动脉压、血氧分压、自主循环恢复时间、复苏成功率及24 h存活率。结果研究组自主恢复时间(16.32±5.23)min、平均动脉压(76.8±4.76)mm Hg、血氧分压(53.74±3.31)mm Hg、复苏成功率(63.64)%均高于对照组(29.41±15.82)min、(72.49±3.17)mm Hg、(43.06±12.32)mm Hg、45.83%,组间对比显示,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);研究组与对照组24 h存活率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论心肺复苏机虽未能明显改善其预后及存活率,但是维持患者的血流动力学状态、提高心肺复苏成功率、缩短自主循环恢复时间优于徒手心肺复苏。

Objective Comparison of Machine and manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation in cardiac arrest rescue effect study on cardiopulmonary resuscitation in cardiac arrest rescue .Methods Group select January 2015—February 2016 of the 46 cases after cardiopulmonary resuscitation in patients, 22 patients with cardiopulmonary,Resuscitation, CPR, for the group; the remaining 24 patients treated with manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation, as the control group. Retrospectively, compared two groups of patients mean arterial pressure, blood oxygen partial pressure, independent cycle recovery-time and recovery success rates and 24-hour survival. Results Research Group recovery time （16.32±5.23） min, mean arterial pres-sure （76.8±4.76） mmHg, blood oxygen partial pressure （53.74±3.31） mmHg, success rate of recovery （63.64%） were higher than the control group （29.41 ±15.82）min、（72.49 ±3.17）mmHg、（43.06 ±12.32）mmHg、45.83%,contrast between groups showed statistically significant （P〈 0.05）; 24 hours group and control group no significant difference （P〉 0.05）. Conclu-sion Machine has failed to improve the prognosis of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and survival, but maintaining the pa-tient＇s hemodynamic status, improve cardio-pulmonary resuscitation success rate, shorten the recovery time of spontaneous circulation better than manual CPR.