• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Efficiency of two-member crews in delivering prehospital advanced life support cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A scoping review

M. Keselica, D. Peřan, M. Renza, F. Duška, D. Omáčka, S. Schnaubelt, I. Lulic, R. Sýkora

. 2024 ; 18 (-) : 100661. [pub] 20240518

Status neindexováno Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, přehledy

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc24012642

BACKGROUND: Advanced Life Support (ALS) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is frequently administered by two-member crews. However, ALS CPR is mostly designed for larger crews, and the feasibility and efficacy of implementing ALS guidelines for only two rescuers remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to examine the existing evidence and identify knowledge gaps in the efficiency of pre-hospital ALS CPR performed by two-member teams. DESIGN: A comprehensive search was undertaken across the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The search covered publications in English or German from January 1, 2005, to November 30, 2023. The review included studies that focused on ALS CPR procedures carried out by two-member teams in adult patients in either simulated or clinical settings. RESULTS: A total of 22 articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. Seven topics in two-person prehospital ALS/CPR delivery were identified: 1) effect of team configuration on clinical outcome and CPR quality, 2) early airway management and ventilation techniques, 3) mechanical chest compressions, 4) prefilled syringes, 5) additional equipment, 6) adaptation of recommended ALS/CPR protocols, and 7) human factors. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of comprehensive data regarding the adaptation of the recommended ALS algorithm in CPR for two-member crews. Although simulation studies indicate potential benefits arising from the employment of mechanical chest compression devices, prefilled syringes, and automation-assisted protocols, the current evidence is too limited to support specific modifications to existing guidelines.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc24012642
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20240726151413.0
007      
ta
008      
240723e20240518ne f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.resplu.2024.100661 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)38784406
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a ne
100    1_
$a Keselica, Miroslav $u Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and FNKV University Hospital, Šrobárova 1150/50, Prague 100 34, Czech Republic
245    10
$a Efficiency of two-member crews in delivering prehospital advanced life support cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A scoping review / $c M. Keselica, D. Peřan, M. Renza, F. Duška, D. Omáčka, S. Schnaubelt, I. Lulic, R. Sýkora
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: Advanced Life Support (ALS) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is frequently administered by two-member crews. However, ALS CPR is mostly designed for larger crews, and the feasibility and efficacy of implementing ALS guidelines for only two rescuers remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to examine the existing evidence and identify knowledge gaps in the efficiency of pre-hospital ALS CPR performed by two-member teams. DESIGN: A comprehensive search was undertaken across the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The search covered publications in English or German from January 1, 2005, to November 30, 2023. The review included studies that focused on ALS CPR procedures carried out by two-member teams in adult patients in either simulated or clinical settings. RESULTS: A total of 22 articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. Seven topics in two-person prehospital ALS/CPR delivery were identified: 1) effect of team configuration on clinical outcome and CPR quality, 2) early airway management and ventilation techniques, 3) mechanical chest compressions, 4) prefilled syringes, 5) additional equipment, 6) adaptation of recommended ALS/CPR protocols, and 7) human factors. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of comprehensive data regarding the adaptation of the recommended ALS algorithm in CPR for two-member crews. Although simulation studies indicate potential benefits arising from the employment of mechanical chest compression devices, prefilled syringes, and automation-assisted protocols, the current evidence is too limited to support specific modifications to existing guidelines.
590    __
$a NEINDEXOVÁNO
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a přehledy $7 D016454
700    1_
$a Peřan, David $u Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and FNKV University Hospital, Šrobárova 1150/50, Prague 100 34, Czech Republic $u Emergency Medical Services of the Karlovy Vary Region, Závodní 390/98C, 360 06 Karlovy Vary, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Renza, Metoděj $u Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and FNKV University Hospital, Šrobárova 1150/50, Prague 100 34, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Duška, František $u Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and FNKV University Hospital, Šrobárova 1150/50, Prague 100 34, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Omáčka, David $u Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and FNKV University Hospital, Šrobárova 1150/50, Prague 100 34, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Schnaubelt, Sebastian $u Department of Emergency Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria $u PULS - Austrian Cardiac Arrest Awareness Association, Vienna, Austria
700    1_
$a Lulic, Ileana $u Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, Clinical Hospital Merkur, Zajceva 19, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
700    1_
$a Sýkora, Roman $u Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and FNKV University Hospital, Šrobárova 1150/50, Prague 100 34, Czech Republic $u Emergency Medical Services of the Karlovy Vary Region, Závodní 390/98C, 360 06 Karlovy Vary, Czech Republic $u Air Rescue Service and Emergency Medicine Department Pilsen-Line, Military Medical Agency, U Letiště, 330 21 Líně, Czech Republic $u Medical College, Duškova 7, 150 00 Prague, Czech Republic
773    0_
$w MED00209367 $t Resuscitation plus $x 2666-5204 $g Roč. 18 (20240518), s. 100661
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38784406 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20240723 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20240726151405 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2125427 $s 1224505
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-PubMed-not-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 18 $c - $d 100661 $e 20240518 $i 2666-5204 $m Resuscitation plus $n Resusc Plus $x MED00209367
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20240723

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace