ダウンロード数: 37

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.authorKawamura, Takashien
dc.contributor.authorHiraide, Atsushien
dc.contributor.authorBerg, Robert A.en
dc.contributor.authorHayashi, Yasuyukien
dc.contributor.authorNishiuchi, Tatsuyaen
dc.contributor.authorKajino, Kentaroen
dc.contributor.authorYonemoto, Naohiroen
dc.contributor.authorYukioka, Hidekazuen
dc.contributor.authorSugimoto, Hisashien
dc.contributor.authorKakuchi, Hiroyukien
dc.contributor.authorSase, Kazuhiroen
dc.contributor.authorYokoyama, Hiroyukien
dc.contributor.authorNonogi, Hiroshien
dc.contributor.alternative石見, 拓ja
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-27T06:15:00Z-
dc.date.available2014-05-27T06:15:00Z-
dc.date.issued2007-12-18-
dc.identifier.issn0009-7322-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2433/187287-
dc.description.abstract[Background] Previous animal and clinical studies suggest that bystander-initiated cardiac-only resuscitation may be superior to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. Our hypothesis was that both cardiac-only bystander resuscitation and conventional bystander CPR would improve outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of ≤15 minutes' duration, whereas the addition of rescue breathing would improve outcomes for cardiac arrests lasting >15 minutes. [Methods and Results] We carried out a prospective, population-based, observational study involving consecutive patients with emergency responder resuscitation attempts from May 1, 1998, through April 30, 2003. The primary outcome measure was 1-year survival with favorable neurological outcome. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between type of CPR and outcomes. Among the 4902 witnessed cardiac arrests, 783 received conventional CPR, and 544 received cardiac-only resuscitation. Excluding very-long-duration cardiac arrests (>15 minutes), the cardiac-only resuscitation yielded a higher rate of 1-year survival with favorable neurological outcome than no bystander CPR (4.3% versus 2.5%; odds ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.01 to 2.95), and conventional CPR showed similar effectiveness (4.1%; odds ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.95 to 2.60). For the very-long-duration arrests, neurologically favorable 1-year survival was greater in the conventional CPR group, but there were few survivors regardless of the type of bystander CPR (0.3% [2 of 624], 0% [0 of 92], and 2.2% [3 of 139] in the no bystander CPR, cardiac-only CPR, and conventional CPR groups, respectively; P<0.05). [Conclusions] Bystander-initiated cardiac-only resuscitation and conventional CPR are similarly effective for most adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. For very prolonged cardiac arrests, the addition of rescue breathing may be of some help.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.publisherAmerican Heart Associationen
dc.rights© 2007 American Heart Association, Inc.en
dc.subjectcardiopulmonary resuscitationen
dc.subjectdeath, suddenen
dc.subjectheart arresten
dc.subjectventricular fibrillationen
dc.titleEffectiveness of Bystander-Initiated Cardiac-Only Resuscitation for Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arresten
dc.typejournal article-
dc.type.niitypeJournal Article-
dc.identifier.ncidAA00133542-
dc.identifier.jtitleCirculationen
dc.identifier.volume116-
dc.identifier.issue25-
dc.identifier.spage2900-
dc.identifier.epage2907-
dc.relation.doi10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.723411-
dc.textversionnone-
dc.identifier.pmid18071072-
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。