Cargando…
A Simulation Study Using a Quality Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Medical Manikin to Evaluate the Effects of Using Personal Protective Equipment on Performance of Emergency Resuscitation by Medical Students from the University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland and Non-Medical Personnel
BACKGROUND: During the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, personal protective equipment (PPE) is used during medical resuscitation aerosol-generating procedures (AGP). This simulation study aimed to evaluate the effects of PPE on the performance of emergency resuscitation by medical stude...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
International Scientific Literature, Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9258245/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35778812 http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.936844 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: During the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, personal protective equipment (PPE) is used during medical resuscitation aerosol-generating procedures (AGP). This simulation study aimed to evaluate the effects of PPE on the performance of emergency resuscitation by medical students from the University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland and non-medical personnel, and used a quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (Q-CPR) medical manikin. MATERIAL/METHODS: A simulation study was conducted using the Resusci Anne quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (Q-CPR) medical manikin (Laerdal Medical AS, Norway). Participants were divided into 2 groups: a medical group of 50 and a non-medical group of 52, matched in pairs. Each pair performed 10 min of manual CPR with a compression-ventilation ratio of 30: 2 wearing PPE for AGP. The reference method was manual CPR wearing casual clothes along with surgical masks and latex gloves. Data about compression and ventilation were gathered using the QCPR Training application from Laerdal Medical. RESULTS: Data analyses indicated statistically significant differences between medical students using PPE for AGP and basic protection: average rate of chest compressions (123 vs 114 per min; P=0.004), chest recoil (69 vs 93; P=0.0050, correct depth of chest compressions (86.5 vs 97; P=0.0081), quality of ventilation (85 vs 89; P=0.0041). Among non-medical personnel however, a statistically significant difference was in the quality of ventilation (69–85.5; P=0.0032). CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study showed that the use of PPE for AGP during CPR was associated with slower average speed of chest compressions, less chest recoil, incorrect depth of chest compressions, and lower quality of ventilation. |
---|