State of implementation of the Corona-Virus-Disease-2019 resuscitation guidelines: An online-based survey one year after publication in Germany; [Stand der Umsetzung der Corona-Virus-Disease-2019-Reanimationsleitlinien: Eine onlinebasierte Umfrage ein Jahr nach Veröffentlichung in Deutschland]

被引:0
|
作者
Jansen G. [1 ]
Kappelhoff N. [4 ]
Flake F. [5 ]
Borgstedt R. [6 ]
Rehberg S. [6 ]
Scholz S.S. [6 ]
Thies K.-C. [6 ]
机构
[1] Department of Anaesthesiology, Operative Intensive Care Medicine
[2] University Hospital OWL, University of Bielefeld, Teutoburgerstr. 50, Bielefeld
[3] Department of Medical and Emergency Services, Study Institute Westfalen-Lippe, Bielefeld, Remterweg 45, Bielefeld
[4] German Association of Emergency Medical Services (Deutscher Berufsverband Rettungsdienst e. V.), Maria-Goeppert-Str. 3, Lübeck
[5] Department of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine, Emergency Medicine
[6] University Hospital OWL, University of Bielefeld, Burgsteig 13, Bielefeld
来源
Die Anaesthesiologie | 2023年 / 72卷 / 6期
关键词
CPR; Education; E‑learning; Lockdown; Pandemic; SARS; Training;
D O I
10.1007/s00101-022-01237-1
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The present study evaluated the implementation of the European Resuscitation Council Corona-Virus-Disease 2019 (COVID-19) resuscitation guidelines in Germany 1 year after publication. Aim of the work: To evaluate the practical implementation of the COVID-19 resuscitation guidelines in Germany one year after their publication. Material and methods: In an online survey between April and May 2021 participants were asked about awareness of COVID-19 resuscitation guidelines, corresponding training, the resuscitation algorithm used and COVID-19 infections of emergency medicine personnel associated with COVID-19 resuscitation. Results: A total of 961 (8%) of the 11,000 members took part in the survey and 85% (818/961) of questionnaires were fully completed. While 577 (70%) of the respondents were aware of the COVID-19 guidelines, only 103 (13%) had received respective training. A specific COVID-19 resuscitation algorithm was used by 265 respondents (32%). Adaptations included personal protective equipment (99%), reduction of staff caring for the patient, or routine use of video laryngoscopy for endotracheal intubation (each 37%), securing the airway before rhythm analysis (32%), and pausing chest compressions during endotracheal intubation (30%). Respondents without a specific COVID-19 resuscitation algorithm were more likely to use mouth-nose protection (47% vs. 31%; p < 0.001), extraglottic airway devices (66% vs. 55%; p = 0.004) and have more than 4 team members close to the patient (45% vs. 38%; p = 0.04). Use of an Filtering-Face-Piece(FFP)-2 or FFP3 mask (89% vs. 77%; p < 0.001; 58% vs. 70%; p ≤ 0.001) or performing primary endotracheal intubation (17% vs. 31%; p < 0.001) were found less frequently and 9% reported that a team member was infected with COVID-19 during resuscitation. Conclusion: The COVID-19 resuscitation guidelines are still insufficiently implemented 1 year after publication. Future publication strategies must ensure that respective guideline adaptations are implemented in a timely manner. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.
引用
收藏
页码:408 / 415
页数:7
相关论文
共 1 条
  • [1] State of implementation of the Corona-Virus-Disease-2019 resuscitation guidelines An online-based survey one year after publication in Germany
    Jansen, Gerrit
    Kappelhoff, Nils
    Flake, Frank
    Borgstedt, Rainer
    Rehberg, Sebastian
    Scholz, Sean S.
    Thies, Karl-Christian
    [J]. ANAESTHESIOLOGIE, 2023, 72 (06): : 408 - 415