PubMed · 14123380
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
A DALTON. 1964. USING A STRYKER FRAME.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14123380/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of different mattresses on cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance and establish whether emergency deflation of an inflatable mattress improves the quality of resuscitation. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomised controlled cross-over trial performed in a general ICU PARTICIPANTS: Critical care staff from a general ICU. INTERVENTIONS: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation on a manikin on the floor or on a bed with a standard foam mattress and inflated and deflated pressure redistributing mattresses. Maximal compression force was measured at different bed heights. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Compression depth, duty cycle and rate and percentage correct expired air ventilation were recorded on a manikin. Compression depth was significantly lower on the foam (35.2 mm), inflated (37.2 mm) and deflated mattress (39.1 mm) than the floor (44.2 mm). There were no clinically important differences in duty cycle or compression rate. The quality of ventilation was poor on all surfaces. Maximal compression force declined as bed height increased. CONCLUSIONS: Resuscitation performance is adversely affected when performed on a bed (irrespective of mattress type) compared to the floor. There were no differences between the inflated and deflated mattresses, although the deflation process did not adversely affect performance. This study does not support the routine deflation of an inflated mattress during resuscitation and questions the potential benefits from using a backboard. The finding that bed height affects maximal compression forces, challenges the recommendation that cardiopulmonary resuscitation be performed with the bed at middle-thigh level and requires further investigation.
CONTEXT: One of the main difficulties in adequately treating the pain of neonatal patients is the scarcity of validated pain evaluation methods for this population. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the reliability of two behavioral pain scales in neonates. TYPE OF STUDY: Cross-sectional. SETTING: University hospital neonatal intensive care unit. PARTICIPANTS: 22 preterm neonates were studied, with gestational age of 34 +/- 2 weeks, birth weight of 1804 +/- 584 g, 68% female, 30 +/- 12 hours of life, and 30% intubated. PROCEDURES: Two neonatologists (A and B) observed the patients at the bedside and on video films for 10 minutes. The Neonatal Facial Coding System and the Clinical Scoring System were scored at 1, 5, and 10 minutes. The final score was the median of the three values for each observer and scale. A and B were blinded to each other. Video assessments were made three months after bedside evaluations. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: End scores were compared between the observers using the intraclass correlation coefficient and bias analysis (paired t test and signal test). RESULTS: For the Neonatal Facial Coding System, at the bedside and on video, A and B showed a significant correlation of scores (intraclass correlation score: 0.62), without bias between them (t test and signal test: p > 0.05). For the Clinical Scoring System bedside assessment, A and B showed correlation of scores (intraclass correlation score: 0.55), but bias was also detected between them: A scored on average two points higher than B (paired t test and signal test: p < 0.05). For the Clinical Scoring System video assessment, A and B did not show correlation of scores (intraclass correlation score: 0.25), and bias was also detected between them (paired t-test and signal test: p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The results strengthen the reliability of the Neonatal Facial Coding System for bedside pain assessment in preterm neonates.