PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: To evaluate whether a simplified self-instruction card can help potential rescue providers use automated external defibrillators (AEDs) more accurately and quickly.
METHODS: From June 1, 2018, to November 30, 2019, a prospective longitudinal randomized controlled simulation study was conducted among 165 laypeople (18-65 years old) without prior AED training. A self-instruction card was designed to illuminate key AED operation procedures. Subjects were randomly divided into the card (n=83) and control (n=82) groups with age stratification. They were then individually evaluated in the same simulated scenario to use AED with (card group) or without the self-instruction card (control group) at baseline, post-training, and at the 3-month follow-up.
RESULTS: At baseline, the card group reached a significantly higher proportion of successful defibrillation (31.1% vs. 15.9%, P=0.03), fully baring the chest (88.9% vs. 63.4%, P<0.001), correct electrode placement (32.5% vs. 17.1%, P=0.03), and resuming cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (72.3% vs. 9.8%, P<0.001). At post-training and follow-up, there were no significant differences in key behaviors, except for resuming CPR. Time to shock and time to resume CPR were shorter in the card group, while time to power-on AED was not different in each phase of tests. In the 55-65 years group, the card group achieved more skill improvements over the control group compared to the other age groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The self-instruction card could serve as a direction for first-time AED users and as a reminder for trained subjects. This could be a practical, cost-effective way to improve the AED skills of potential rescue providers among different age groups, including seniors.
METHODS: From June 1, 2018, to November 30, 2019, a prospective longitudinal randomized controlled simulation study was conducted among 165 laypeople (18-65 years old) without prior AED training. A self-instruction card was designed to illuminate key AED operation procedures. Subjects were randomly divided into the card (n=83) and control (n=82) groups with age stratification. They were then individually evaluated in the same simulated scenario to use AED with (card group) or without the self-instruction card (control group) at baseline, post-training, and at the 3-month follow-up.
RESULTS: At baseline, the card group reached a significantly higher proportion of successful defibrillation (31.1% vs. 15.9%, P=0.03), fully baring the chest (88.9% vs. 63.4%, P<0.001), correct electrode placement (32.5% vs. 17.1%, P=0.03), and resuming cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (72.3% vs. 9.8%, P<0.001). At post-training and follow-up, there were no significant differences in key behaviors, except for resuming CPR. Time to shock and time to resume CPR were shorter in the card group, while time to power-on AED was not different in each phase of tests. In the 55-65 years group, the card group achieved more skill improvements over the control group compared to the other age groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The self-instruction card could serve as a direction for first-time AED users and as a reminder for trained subjects. This could be a practical, cost-effective way to improve the AED skills of potential rescue providers among different age groups, including seniors.
摘要：
背景：评估简化的自我指导卡是否可以帮助潜在的救援提供者更准确，更快速地使用自动体外除颤器（AED）。
方法：从2018年6月1日至2019年11月30日，在未经AED培训的165名外行人（18-65岁）中进行了一项前瞻性纵向随机对照模拟研究。设计了一个自我指导卡，以照亮关键的AED操作程序。根据年龄分层，将受试者随机分为卡片组（n=83）和对照组（n=82）。然后在相同的模拟场景中对他们进行单独评估，以在基线时使用有（卡组）或没有自我指导卡（对照组）的AED，培训后,在3个月的随访中。
结果：在基线时，卡组除颤成功的比例明显更高(31.1%vs.15.9%,P=0.03),完全露出胸部(88.9%vs.63.4%,P<0.001)，正确的电极放置（32.5%与17.1%,P=0.03),并恢复心肺复苏(CPR)(72.3%vs.9.8%,P<0.001)。在培训后和后续行动中，关键行为没有显着差异，除了恢复心肺复苏术。卡组的休克时间和恢复心肺复苏的时间较短，而AED的通电时间在每个测试阶段都没有差异。在55-65岁组中，与其他年龄组相比，卡组比对照组获得了更多的技能改善。
结论：自我指导卡可以作为首次AED用户的指导，也可以作为受过训练的受试者的提醒。这可能是一个实际的，以具有成本效益的方式提高不同年龄段潜在救援提供者的AED技能，包括老年人。
方法：从2018年6月1日至2019年11月30日，在未经AED培训的165名外行人（18-65岁）中进行了一项前瞻性纵向随机对照模拟研究。设计了一个自我指导卡，以照亮关键的AED操作程序。根据年龄分层，将受试者随机分为卡片组（n=83）和对照组（n=82）。然后在相同的模拟场景中对他们进行单独评估，以在基线时使用有（卡组）或没有自我指导卡（对照组）的AED，培训后,在3个月的随访中。
结果：在基线时，卡组除颤成功的比例明显更高(31.1%vs.15.9%,P=0.03),完全露出胸部(88.9%vs.63.4%,P<0.001)，正确的电极放置（32.5%与17.1%,P=0.03),并恢复心肺复苏(CPR)(72.3%vs.9.8%,P<0.001)。在培训后和后续行动中，关键行为没有显着差异，除了恢复心肺复苏术。卡组的休克时间和恢复心肺复苏的时间较短，而AED的通电时间在每个测试阶段都没有差异。在55-65岁组中，与其他年龄组相比，卡组比对照组获得了更多的技能改善。
结论：自我指导卡可以作为首次AED用户的指导，也可以作为受过训练的受试者的提醒。这可能是一个实际的，以具有成本效益的方式提高不同年龄段潜在救援提供者的AED技能，包括老年人。
