RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the differences in the quality and self-perception of CPR performed with foot technique compared to the standard technique with the hands in nursing students. METHODS: 65 university nursing students participated in a randomized simulation crossover design study. The participants randomly performed two CPR tests: CPR by foot and CPR by hands techniques. The compression-only protocol with a 2-min test was used with the Resusci Anne QCPR® manikin and Wireless Skill Reporter® software, both from Laerdal. RESULTS: Participants had lower quality when doing CPR by foot (72%) than when doing standard CPR (91%) (p = 0.006). 95% of the participants indicated standard CPR as the technique of choice, while 92% indicated that they would use CPR by foot if it was not possible to perform standard technique. CONCLUSIONS: CPR quality was lower when performing foot technique, although with positive results. It would be advisable for people with acquired CPR skills to know that they can do foot compressions in situations where they cannot use their hands.
Assuntos
Reanimação Cardiopulmonar/métodos , Pé , Massagem Cardíaca/métodos , Adulto , Simulação por Computador , Estudos Cross-Over , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudantes de EnfermagemRESUMO
INTRODUCCIÓN: Se ha observado que los profesionales sanitarios tienen dificultades para realizar maniobras de reanimación cardiopulmonar (RCP) de calidad. Nuestro objetivo ha sido comparar la calidad de las ventilaciones en un modelo de lactante según el método utilizado (boca a boca y nariz o bien bolsa autoinflable y mascarilla facial) por estudiantes de Enfermería. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Estudio cuasiexperimental de corte transversal que incluyó a 46 estudiantes de Enfermería de segundo curso. Se realizaron 2pruebas cuantitativas de RCP pediátrica de 4 min: a) con ventilación boca a boca y nariz; b) con ventilación con bolsa autoinflable y mascarilla facial. Se utilizó un maniquí Resusci Baby QCPR Wireless SkillReporter(R) de Laerdal. Se registraron y analizaron los porcentajes de ventilaciones con volumen adecuado, excesivo e insuficiente, además de la calidad global de la RCP (ventilaciones y compresiones torácicas). RESULTADOS: Los estudiantes consiguieron dar más ventilaciones con volumen apropiado con el método boca a boca y nariz (55 ± 22%) que con bolsa y mascarilla (28 ± 16%; p < 0,001). La calidad global de la RCP también fue significativamente superior cuando aplicaron el método boca a boca y nariz (60 ± 19 vs. 48 ± 16%; p < 0,001). CONCLUSIONES: La ventilación boca a boca y nariz es más eficiente que la ventilación con bolsa autoinflable y mascarilla facial en la RCP realizada por estudiantes de Enfermería con un modelo simulado de lactante
INTRODUCTION: It has been observed that health professionals have difficulty performing quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The aim of this study was to compare the quality of ventilations performed by Nursing students on an infant model using different methods (mouth-to-mouth-and-nose or bag-valve-mask). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A quasi-experimental cross-sectional study was performed that included 46 second-year Nursing students. Two quantitative 4-minute tests of paediatric CPR were performed: a) mouth-to-mouth-and-nose ventilations, and b) ventilations with bag-valve-mask. A Resusci Baby QCPR Wireless SkillReporter(R) mannequin from Laerdal was used. The proportion of ventilations with adequate, excessive, and insufficient volume was recorded and analysed, as well as the overall quality of the CPR (ventilations and chest compressions). RESULTS: The students were able to give a higher number of ventilations with adequate volume using the mouth-to-mouth-and-nose method (55 ± 22%) than with the bag-valve-mask (28 ± 16%, P < .001). The overall quality of the CPR was also significantly higher when using the mouth-to-mouth-and-nose method (60 ± 19 vs. 48 ± 16%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Mouth-to-mouth-and-nose ventilation method is more efficient than bag-valve-mask ventilations in CPR performed by nursing students with a simulated infant model
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adolescente , Adulto Jovem , Adulto , Reanimação Cardiopulmonar/métodos , Respiração Artificial , Estudantes de Enfermagem/estatística & dados numéricos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados não Aleatórios como Assunto , Educação em Enfermagem , Máscaras Faciais , ManequinsRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: It has been observed that health professionals have difficulty performing quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The aim of this study was to compare the quality of ventilations performed by Nursing students on an infant model using different methods (mouth-to-mouth-and-nose or bag-valve-mask). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A quasi-experimental cross-sectional study was performed that included 46 second-year Nursing students. Two quantitative 4-minute tests of paediatric CPR were performed: a) mouth-to-mouth-and-nose ventilations, and b) ventilations with bag-valve-mask. A Resusci Baby QCPR Wireless SkillReporter® mannequin from Laerdal was used. The proportion of ventilations with adequate, excessive, and insufficient volume was recorded and analysed, as well as the overall quality of the CPR (ventilations and chest compressions). RESULTS: The students were able to give a higher number of ventilations with adequate volume using the mouth-to-mouth-and-nose method (55±22%) than with the bag-valve-mask (28±16%, P<.001). The overall quality of the CPR was also significantly higher when using the mouth-to-mouth-and-nose method (60±19 vs. 48±16%, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mouth-to-mouth-and-nose ventilation method is more efficient than bag-valve-mask ventilations in CPR performed by nursing students with a simulated infant model.
