• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Automatické externí defibrilátory k domácímu použití
[Home use of automated external defibrillators for sudden cardiac arrest]

G. H. Bardy, et al.

. 2008 ; 2 (4) : 28-29.

Jazyk čeština Země Česko

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc07519481

The most common location of out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest is the home, a situation in which emergency medical services are challenged to provide timely care. Consequently, home use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) might offer an opportunity to improve survival for patients at risk. METHODS: We randomly assigned 7001 patients with previous anterior-wall myocardial infarction who were not candidates for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator to receive one of two responses to sudden cardiac arrest occurring at home: either the control response (calling emergency medical services and performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR]) or the use of an AED, followed by calling emergency medical services and performing CPR. The primary outcome was death from any cause. RESULTS: The median age of the patients was 62 years; 17% were women. The median follow-up was 37.3 months. Overall, 450 patients died: 228 of 3506 patients (6.5%) in the control group and 222 of 3495 patients (6.4%) in the AED group (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.17; P=0.77). Mortality did not differ significantly in major prespecified subgroups. Only 160 deaths (35.6%) were considered to be from sudden cardiac arrest from tachyarrhythmia. Of these deaths, 117 occurred at home; 58 at-home events were witnessed. AEDs were used in 32 patients. Of these patients, 14 received an appropriate shock, and 4 survived to hospital discharge. There were no documented inappropriate shocks. CONCLUSIONS: For survivors of anterior-wall myocardial infarction who were not candidates for implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator, access to a home AED did not significantly improve overall survival, as compared with reliance on conventional resuscitation methods. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00047411 [ClinicalTrials.gov].). Copyright 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society.

Home use of automated external defibrillators for sudden cardiac arrest

Recenze v:

Komentář [k článku Automatické externí defibrilátory k domácímu použití].

000      
00000naa 2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc07519481
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20111210130815.0
008      
090317s2008 xr e cze||
009      
AR
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $c ABA008 $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a cze $b eng
044    __
$a xr
100    1_
$a Bardy, Gust H.
245    10
$a Automatické externí defibrilátory k domácímu použití / $c G. H. Bardy, et al.
246    11
$a Home use of automated external defibrillators for sudden cardiac arrest
314    __
$a Seattle Institute for Cardiac Research, Seattle
520    9_
$a The most common location of out-of-hospital sudden cardiac arrest is the home, a situation in which emergency medical services are challenged to provide timely care. Consequently, home use of an automated external defibrillator (AED) might offer an opportunity to improve survival for patients at risk. METHODS: We randomly assigned 7001 patients with previous anterior-wall myocardial infarction who were not candidates for an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator to receive one of two responses to sudden cardiac arrest occurring at home: either the control response (calling emergency medical services and performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR]) or the use of an AED, followed by calling emergency medical services and performing CPR. The primary outcome was death from any cause. RESULTS: The median age of the patients was 62 years; 17% were women. The median follow-up was 37.3 months. Overall, 450 patients died: 228 of 3506 patients (6.5%) in the control group and 222 of 3495 patients (6.4%) in the AED group (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.17; P=0.77). Mortality did not differ significantly in major prespecified subgroups. Only 160 deaths (35.6%) were considered to be from sudden cardiac arrest from tachyarrhythmia. Of these deaths, 117 occurred at home; 58 at-home events were witnessed. AEDs were used in 32 patients. Of these patients, 14 received an appropriate shock, and 4 survived to hospital discharge. There were no documented inappropriate shocks. CONCLUSIONS: For survivors of anterior-wall myocardial infarction who were not candidates for implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator, access to a home AED did not significantly improve overall survival, as compared with reliance on conventional resuscitation methods. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00047411 [ClinicalTrials.gov].). Copyright 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society.
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    _2
$a kardiopulmonální resuscitace $7 D016887
650    _2
$a náhlá srdeční smrt $x epidemiologie $x etiologie $7 D016757
650    _2
$a defibrilátory $7 D047548
650    _2
$a urgentní zdravotnické služby $7 D004632
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a srdeční zástava $x etiologie $x mortalita $x terapie $7 D006323
650    _2
$a domácí ošetřování $7 D006701
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a Kaplanův-Meierův odhad $7 D053208
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a mortalita $7 D009026
650    _2
$a infarkt myokardu $x komplikace $7 D009203
773    0_
$w MED00012706 $t Clinical cardiology alert $g Roč. 2, č. 4 (2008), s. 28-29 $x 1213-2586
787    18
$w bmc07519485 $i Recenze v: $t Komentář [k článku Automatické externí defibrilátory k domácímu použití]
910    __
$a ABA008 $b B 2242 $c 407 a $y 9
990    __
$a 20090316150514 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20090430111339 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 637290 $s 490066
BAS    __
$a 3
BMC    __
$a 2008 $b 2 $c 4 $d 28-29 $i 1213-2586 $m Clinical Cardiology Alert $x MED00012706
LZP    __
$a 2009-12/mkme

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace