医学
环甲切开术
重复措施设计
紧急医疗服务
插管
外科
急诊医学
气道管理
数学
统计
作者
Jillian M. Dorsam,Steven R. Cornelius,Julie B. McLean,Gregory J. Zarow,Alexandra C Walchak,Sean P. Conley,Paul J Roszko
标识
DOI:10.1080/10903127.2018.1518506
摘要
BACKGROUND: (CC), and Bougie-assisted Technique (BAT). However, no previous studies have compared these devices in application time, application success, user ratings, and user preference. METHODS: United States Navy Corpsmen (N = 25) were provided 15 minutes of standardized instruction, followed by hands-on practice with each device on airway mannequins. Participants then performed SC with each of the 3 devices in a randomly assigned sequence. In this within-subjects design, application time, application success, participant ratings, and participant preference data were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA, regression, and non-parametric statistics at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Application time for CC (M = 184 sec, 95% CI 144-225 sec) was significantly slower than for BAT (M = 135 sec, 95% CI 113-158 sec, p < 0.03) and TCK (M = 117 sec, 95% CI 93-142 sec, p < 0.005). Success was significantly greater for BAT (76%) than for TCK (40%, p < 0.02) and trended greater than CC (48%, p = 0.07). CC was rated significantly lower than TCK and BAT in ease of application, effectiveness, and reliability (each p < 0.01). User preference was significantly (p < 0.01) higher for TCK (58%) and BAT (42%) than for CC (0%). Improved CC blade design was the most common user suggestion. CONCLUSION: cannot be recommended until improvements are made to the blade design.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI