Injuries Associated with Prehospital CPR Provided by Professionals and Non-Professionals in Bangkok EMS

Chakrapong Victor, Nitikorn Poriswanish
{"title":"Injuries Associated with Prehospital CPR Provided by Professionals and Non-Professionals in Bangkok EMS","authors":"Chakrapong Victor, Nitikorn Poriswanish","doi":"10.56068/gvwa7665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: This study is to concentrate on adverse outcomes of CPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) among different performers that are trained first responders, professional practitioners, and automated devices by exploring types of injuries and comparing between datasets. It is also to find out potential contributing factors for each injury which display statistical significance. \nMethods: Forensic autopsy data from a single center covering almost half of Bangkok and her outskirts which were performed during October 2020 to January 2021 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The data were divided into 3 groups, namely, TFR (trained first responder), PP (professional practitioner), and Auto (automated device i.e. LUCAS system). Thoraco-abdominal injuries were recorded including soft tissue, bone and internal viscera. Factors including age, BMI, sternal length (SL) and chest circumference (CC) were categorized in each injury. Statistical comparison between groups and analysis for significant factors were performed. \nResults: A total number of 158 cases reported as OHCA with exclusion of thoraco-abdominal injuries were recruited. The most commonly found as a hallmark of CPR injuries are chest wall fractures especially those of ribs (65.7%). Bilateral anterior rib fractures are more common than unilateral. Significantly associated factors to rib fractures are age and BMI. Other injuries are sternal fractures, lung contusions and lacerations, epicardial and subendocardial hemorrhages, cardiac contusions, liver lacerations, and pancreatic and splenic hemorrhages. No statistical difference between injuries generated by trained first responders and professional practitioners. LUCAS devices show higher incidence of injuries than manual CPR. \nConclusion: This study may provide useful information for clinicians to investigate and monitor potential CPR complications as well as for forensic physicians to concern the injuries possibly caused by CPR.","PeriodicalId":73465,"journal":{"name":"International journal of paramedicine","volume":"5 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of paramedicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56068/gvwa7665","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study is to concentrate on adverse outcomes of CPR in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) among different performers that are trained first responders, professional practitioners, and automated devices by exploring types of injuries and comparing between datasets. It is also to find out potential contributing factors for each injury which display statistical significance. Methods: Forensic autopsy data from a single center covering almost half of Bangkok and her outskirts which were performed during October 2020 to January 2021 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The data were divided into 3 groups, namely, TFR (trained first responder), PP (professional practitioner), and Auto (automated device i.e. LUCAS system). Thoraco-abdominal injuries were recorded including soft tissue, bone and internal viscera. Factors including age, BMI, sternal length (SL) and chest circumference (CC) were categorized in each injury. Statistical comparison between groups and analysis for significant factors were performed. Results: A total number of 158 cases reported as OHCA with exclusion of thoraco-abdominal injuries were recruited. The most commonly found as a hallmark of CPR injuries are chest wall fractures especially those of ribs (65.7%). Bilateral anterior rib fractures are more common than unilateral. Significantly associated factors to rib fractures are age and BMI. Other injuries are sternal fractures, lung contusions and lacerations, epicardial and subendocardial hemorrhages, cardiac contusions, liver lacerations, and pancreatic and splenic hemorrhages. No statistical difference between injuries generated by trained first responders and professional practitioners. LUCAS devices show higher incidence of injuries than manual CPR. Conclusion: This study may provide useful information for clinicians to investigate and monitor potential CPR complications as well as for forensic physicians to concern the injuries possibly caused by CPR.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
曼谷急救中心专业人员和非专业人员进行院前心肺复苏时造成的伤害
背景:本研究通过探究损伤类型和数据集之间的比较,集中研究在院外心脏骤停(OHCA)情况下,受过训练的急救人员、专业从业人员和自动设备等不同执行者在心肺复苏过程中的不良后果。此外,还要找出每种损伤的潜在诱因,这些诱因在统计学上具有重要意义。研究方法回顾性收集并分析了一个中心在 2020 年 10 月至 2021 年 1 月期间进行的法医尸检数据,这些数据几乎覆盖了半个曼谷及其郊区。数据分为三组,即 TFR(训练有素的急救人员)、PP(专业从业人员)和 Auto(自动装置,即 LUCAS 系统)。胸腹部损伤记录包括软组织、骨骼和内脏。年龄、体重指数(BMI)、胸骨长度(SL)和胸围(CC)等因素在每种损伤中都进行了分类。进行组间统计比较和重要因素分析。结果共收集了 158 例报告为 OHCA 的病例,其中排除了胸腹损伤。最常见的心肺复苏损伤是胸壁骨折,尤其是肋骨骨折(65.7%)。双侧前肋骨骨折比单侧更常见。肋骨骨折的重要相关因素是年龄和体重指数。其他损伤包括胸骨骨折、肺挫伤和撕裂伤、心外膜和心内膜下出血、心脏挫伤、肝脏撕裂伤、胰腺和脾脏出血。训练有素的急救人员和专业从业人员造成的伤害在统计学上没有差异。与人工心肺复苏术相比,LUCAS 设备的损伤发生率更高。结论:这项研究可为临床医生调查和监测潜在的心肺复苏并发症提供有用信息,也可为法医关注心肺复苏可能造成的损伤提供有用信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Quantifying Threat or Challenge Response of Undergraduate Paramedicine Students During High-Stress Clinical Scenarios The State of Emergency Medical Services Clinician Mental Health in Virginia Demonstration of Doppler Ultrasound Pulse Detection by Trained Prehospital Personnel Influence of Rurality When Accessing Emergency Healthcare During Exacerbation of Asthma Paramedicine Contents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1