심폐소생술 방법 변화에 따른 quality 비교 - 30:2와 2:30 비교분석실험 -

Comparison of quality of 30:2 vs. 2:30 CPR in manikins

Purpose: To minimize an interruption in chest compression, reduce the hands-off time, the American Heart Association has recommended the ratio of chest compression to ventilation ratio to 30:2 from 2005 CPR guideline to 2010 CPR guideline. However, current studies have shown that the hands-off time was > 10 seconds with that method. For this reason, we devised new CPR method that a ventilation to chest compression ratio of 2:30 to reduce pt assessment time and skipped the assessment step of carotid artery pulse would be a more effective way to reduce the hands-off time & the time to set the CPR. According to the more detailed purpose are listed below. 1) We would like to confirm efficiency of a ventilation to chest compression ratio of 2:30 than a chest compression to ventilation ratio of 30:2 to reduce the hands-off time & the time to set the CPR. 2) We would like to evaluate possibility of increasing for chest compression accuracy of a ventilation to chest compression ratio of 2:30 than a chest compression to ventilation ratio of 30:2 3) We would like to evaluate possibility of increasing for ventilation accuracy of a ventilation to chest compression ratio of 2:30 than a chest compression to ventilation ratio of 30:2 Methods: According to 2005 American Heart Association Guidelines, 60 paramedic students(20 students X freshmen, sophomore, junior) performed 5 cycles of 3~ chest compressions : 2 ventilations after A, B, C evaluation with Laerdal Resusci R Anne SkillReporters. After 5 minutes rest, the 60 students performed 5 cycles of 2 ventilations : 30 chest compressions after A, B evaluation with the manikins between 13 and 17 September 2010. The short reports including speed & accuracy of chest compression, respiratory, CPR cycle were gained from the manikins. Hands-off times were measured by assistants. Results: Recently, the importance of high quality CPR was emphasized in order to perform the CPR faster and more accurate. To find out improving the conventional CPR method, we switch the procedure of the compression and the ventilation. By switching the procedure back and forth, we are able to compare the effectiveness of CPR between two type of CPR method which are 2:30 and 30:2 methods. 2:30 is that the breaths is delivered twice, first and perform 30 compressions while 30:2 perform 30 compressions first and give 2 breaths followed by the ABC method. Also, we verify the effectiveness of the hands off time, compression accuracy of the compression through the comparison of the two procedure as mentioned earlier. Consequently research verified that 2:30 is the efficient by providing faster set up delivering more accurate chest compression. Conclusion: 2:30 can minimize a time delay from cardiac standstill until starting the chest compression. In addition, hands-off time which is an interruption in chest compression can be shortened by 2:30 method, which result to effective oxygenation of coronary artery & maintenance of the bloodstream. Once again, performing the 2:30 method provide lessen hands off time and increase the accuracy of the chest compression.