查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- The Laryngeal Mask Airway: The Preferred Simple Airway Device for Resuscitation Training in Taiwan
- Epiglottic Hematoma Secondary to Endotracheal Intubation
- Alternation of One-lung and Two-lung Ventilations with the Same Single-lumen Endobronchial Tube during Thoracoscopic Surgery--A Case Report
- Anesthesia for Ankylosing Spondylitis Patients Undergoing Transpedicle Vertebrectomy
- Intubation of Newborn during Delivery with Intact Umbilical Cord--A Case Report
- Obstruction of an Armoured Endotracheal Tube: Report of Two Cases
- Awareness of Intubation with Thiopental as Induction Agent
- Alternative Antegrade Method for Endotracheal Tube Replacement
- Evaluation of Fixation of Oral Endotracheal Tube in Edenturous Patients
- Unilateral Vocal Cord Paralysis Following Endotracheal Intubation--A Case Report
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | The Laryngeal Mask Airway: The Preferred Simple Airway Device for Resuscitation Training in Taiwan=喉罩式氣道:臺灣急救學員偏好之簡單易學的訓練器材 |
---|---|
作 者 | 林世崇; 謝凱生; 蔡米山; 郭美娟; 李孟峰; 楊惠琳; 楊金柳; 王素琴; 陳俞成; | 書刊名 | 中華民國重症醫學雜誌 |
卷 期 | 3:3 2001.07[民90.07] |
頁 次 | 頁211-219 |
專 輯 | 心臟專題 |
分類號 | 415.22 |
關鍵詞 | 喉罩式氣道; 快速型喉罩式氣道; 標準型喉罩式氣道; 氣管內管; 急救訓練; Laryngeal mask airway; LMA; LMA-fastrach; LMA-classical; Endotracheal tube; ETT; Resuscitation training; |
語 文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 喉罩式氣道(Laryngeal Mask Airway,LMA)自1983年首次使用在麻醉病人後,直到最近真正後在急救的呼吸道維持。固定而安全的氣道維持,除了傳統的氣管內管(ETT)之外,2000年的高級心臟急救術(ACLS),已明文推LMA也是其中之一的方式,本文是針對國內醫護人員在ACLS訓練課程中,比較快速型LMA(LMA-Fastrach,LMAF)及ETT的技術困難度及學員接受度。本路在三個數學醫學院分別為ACLS訓練課程之學員。在此之前沒有人學過LMAF。分別由三個不同的指導員示範教學及給予自由練習。技術考試時,由學員自行選擇LMAF或ETT作為考試測量之技術。LMAF均由同一技術員測量時間,ETT由該醫院之總醫師測量。時間之測量,由器械之準備開始,至插管完成,並擠壓袋辦面罩,看到假人之兩側肺擴張。結果顯示60%的學員傾向使用LMAF,40%選擇ETT。插管平均時間,LMAF比ETT快很多(23.4±1.9秒,v.s. 71±7.1秒)。不同醫院之間之LAF時間亦有不同。時間最短者為A醫院,(18.4±0.9秒),依序為B醫院(21.5±0.9秒),C醫院(42.3±7.8秒)。ETT最短為A醫院(47.8±3.5秒),依序為B醫院(62.7±7.0秒),C醫院(112.6±13.1秒)。但各醫院內之醫療人員互相比較LMAF及ETT之插管平均時間,並無顯著差異。結論:較多的學員偏好LMAF,作為氣道維持術。LMAF易學,且插管時間較短。但因學習環境之差異,會影響LMAF插管的時間長短。 |
英文摘要 | An inter-hospital comparison study was undertaken to assess the potential values of insertion of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA-Fastrach , LMAF) and endotracheal tube (ETT) as methods of airway management on the resuscitation training program during the course of advanced cardiac life support (ALCS). Twenty-four medical doctors, 189 nursing staff and 7 medical technicians were assessed in three different hospitals (categorized as A, B, and C Hospital, respectively) during their ACLS provider training courses. We measured the time course from preparing LMAF or ETT to successful ventilation with bilateral lung expansion of the manikins. The providers were taught both methods of airway insertion, and had the same time period of practicing each skill test. Sixty per cent of the providers (132/220) preferred LMAF while 40% (88/220) chose ETT. Success rates for LMAF and ETT insertions were 100% and 80. 7%, respectively. Insertion was quicker with the LMAF (23.4±1.9 seconds) than ETT (71±7.1) among all the providers. Inter-hospital comparison on LMAF insertion time revealed significant differences: A(18.4±0.9), B(21.5±0.9), and C (42.3±7.8). ETT insertion time was also significantly different among the studied hospitals: A (47.6±3.5), B (62.7±7.0), and C(112.6±13.1). All medical doctors had quicker LMF insertion than the nursing staff (18.4±2.0 v.s. 24.1±2.3, p<0.05) as well as in ETT insertion (53±11.6 vs 73.6±7.8, p<0.05). Intra-hospital comparison revealed no significant difference in LMAF and ETT insertion times between doctors and nurses in all three hospitals. We conclude that more ACLS providers prefer LMAF as their skill test, and that studet6ns perform LMAF more successfully than ETT. Time for insertion of LMAF is shorter than ET in either inter-hospital or intra-hospital medical personnel. The significant difference observed in both LMAF and ETT insertion times among the studied hospitals implies that the providers’ performance may vary in different environment. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。