ダウンロード数: 33

このアイテムのファイル:
このアイテムに関連するファイルはありません。
完全メタデータレコード
DCフィールド言語
dc.contributor.authorIwami, Takuen
dc.contributor.authorKitamura, Tetsuhisaen
dc.contributor.authorKawamura, Takashien
dc.contributor.authorMitamura, Hideoen
dc.contributor.authorNagao, Kenen
dc.contributor.authorTakayama, Morimasaen
dc.contributor.authorSeino, Yoshihikoen
dc.contributor.authorTanaka, Hideharuen
dc.contributor.authorNonogi, Hiroshien
dc.contributor.authorYonemoto, Naohiroen
dc.contributor.authorKimura, Takeshien
dc.contributor.alternative石見, 拓ja
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-23T08:02:57Z-
dc.date.available2014-05-23T08:02:57Z-
dc.date.issued2012-12-11-
dc.identifier.issn0009-7322-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2433/187271-
dc.description.abstract[Background]It remains unclear which is more effective to increase survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in those with public-access defibrillation, bystander-initiated chest compression–only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) or conventional CPR with rescue breathing. [Methods and Results]A nationwide, prospective, population-based observational study covering the whole population of Japan and involving consecutive out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients with resuscitation attempts has been conducted since 2005. We enrolled all out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of presumed cardiac origin that were witnessed and received shocks with public-access automated external defibrillation (AEDs) by bystanders from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2009. The main outcome measure was neurologically favorable 1-month survival. We compared outcomes by type of bystander-initiated CPR (chest compression–only CPR and conventional CPR with compressions and rescue breathing). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between the type of CPR and a better neurological outcome. During the 5 years, 1376 bystander-witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of cardiac origin in individuals who received CPR and shocks with public-access AEDs by bystanders were registered. Among them, 506 (36.8%) received chest compression–only CPR and 870 (63.2%) received conventional CPR. The chest compression–only CPR group (40.7%, 206 of 506) had a significantly higher rate of 1-month survival with favorable neurological outcome than the conventional CPR group (32.9%, 286 of 870; adjusted odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.03–1.70). [Conclusions]Compression-only CPR is more effective than conventional CPR for patients in whom out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is witnessed and shocked with public-access defibrillation. Compression-only CPR is the most likely scenario in which lay rescuers can witness a sudden collapse and use public-access AEDs.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.publisherAmerican Heart Associationen
dc.rights© 2012 American Heart Association, Inc.en
dc.subjectcardiopulmonary resuscitationen
dc.subjectdeath, suddenen
dc.subjectdefibrillatorsen
dc.subjectepidemiologyen
dc.subjectheart arresten
dc.titleChest Compression–Only Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest With Public-Access Defibrillation : A Nationwide Cohort Studyen
dc.typejournal article-
dc.type.niitypeJournal Article-
dc.identifier.ncidAA00133542-
dc.identifier.jtitleCirculationen
dc.identifier.volume126-
dc.identifier.issue24-
dc.identifier.spage2844-
dc.identifier.epage2851-
dc.relation.doi10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.109504-
dc.textversionnone-
dc.identifier.pmid23230315-
dcterms.accessRightsmetadata only access-
dc.identifier.pissn0009-7322-
dc.identifier.eissn1524-4539-
出現コレクション:学術雑誌掲載論文等

アイテムの簡略レコードを表示する

Export to RefWorks


出力フォーマット 


このリポジトリに保管されているアイテムはすべて著作権により保護されています。