| |
著者: SOS-KANTO study group
雑誌名: Lancet. 2007 Mar 17;369(9565):920-6. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60451-6.
Abstract/Text
BACKGROUND: Mouth-to-mouth ventilation is a barrier to bystanders doing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), but few clinical studies have investigated the efficacy of bystander resuscitation by chest compressions without mouth-to-mouth ventilation (cardiac-only resuscitation).
METHODS: We did a prospective, multicentre, observational study of patients who had out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. On arrival at the scene, paramedics assessed the technique of bystander resuscitation. The primary endpoint was favourable neurological outcome 30 days after cardiac arrest.
FINDINGS: 4068 adult patients who had out-of-hospital cardiac arrest witnessed by bystanders were included; 439 (11%) received cardiac-only resuscitation from bystanders, 712 (18%) conventional CPR, and 2917 (72%) received no bystander CPR. Any resuscitation attempt was associated with a higher proportion having favourable neurological outcomes than no resuscitation (5.0%vs 2.2%, p<0.0001). Cardiac-only resuscitation resulted in a higher proportion of patients with favourable neurological outcomes than conventional CPR in patients with apnoea (6.2%vs 3.1%; p=0.0195), with shockable rhythm (19.4%vs 11.2%, p=0.041), and with resuscitation that started within 4 min of arrest (10.1%vs 5.1%, p=0.0221). However, there was no evidence for any benefit from the addition of mouth-to-mouth ventilation in any subgroup. The adjusted odds ratio for a favourable neurological outcome after cardiac-only resuscitation was 2.2 (95% CI 1.2-4.2) in patients who received any resuscitation from bystanders.
INTERPRETATION: Cardiac-only resuscitation by bystanders is the preferable approach to resuscitation for adult patients with witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, especially those with apnoea, shockable rhythm, or short periods of untreated arrest.
PMID 17368153 Lancet. 2007 Mar 17;369(9565):920-6. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60451-6.
|
