目的 探讨良肢位训练联合风险预控急救应用于重症脑卒中的效果。方法 采用回顾性分析,纳入我院2020年3月—2021年3月期间收治的41例重症脑卒中患者为对照组,救治方式为常规救治联合良肢位训练。同时纳入我院2021年4月—2022年4月期间收治的41例重症脑卒中患者为观察组,救治方式为良肢位训练联合风险预控急救。对比2组抢救情况、抢救效果、运动功能。结果 观察组院外吸氧率（46.34%）、院外插管率（34.15%）均高于对照组（17.07%、9.76%）,转入专科治疗时间、发病至入院时间均短于对照组（P<0.05）;干预3 d后,观察组格拉斯哥昏迷量表分值高于对照组,APACHEⅡ评分分值低于对照组（P<0.05）;观察组Fugl-Meyer运动评估、Berg平衡量表分值均高于对照组,NIHSS量表分值低于对照组（P<0.05）。结论 良肢位训练联合风险预控急救应用于重症脑卒中可有效改善抢救情况、提升抢救效果,从而增强运动功能。

Objective To explore the effect of normal extremity position training combined with risk pre-control emergency treatment in severe stroke．Methods Forty-one severe stroke patients from March 2020 to March 2021 included in the control group were retrospective studied,and the treatment method was conventional treatment combined with normal extremity position training．At the same time,41 severe stroke patients from April 2021 to April 2022 were included in the observation group,which the treatment method was the risk pre-control and emergency treatment．The rescue situation,rescue effect and sports function of the two groups were compared．Results Incidences of oxygen inhalation（46.34%）and intubation（34.15%）outside the hospital in observation group were higher than that in control group（17.07%,9.76%）;specialist treatment,onset to admission time were longer in control group（P<0.05）．Glasgow coma scale score in observation group was higher than that in control group,while APACHE Ⅱ score was lower in observation group（P<0.05）,Fugl-Meyer assessment and Berg Balance Scale score were higher,and NIHSS score was lower than control group（P<0.05）．Conclusions Combination of normal extremity position training and risk pre-control emergency treatment in severe stroke treatment can effectively improve the rescue effect,thus enhance the motor function．

目的 分析心力衰竭伴快速心房颤动(简称:心衰伴快速房颤)患者接受胺碘酮急诊抢救治疗的效果及对24 h心室率的影响。方法 将2017年1月—2020年12月急诊接诊且行西地兰治疗的60例心衰伴快速房颤患者作为对照组,将同期急诊接诊且行胺碘酮治疗的60例心衰伴快速房颤患者作为观察组,对组间心功能指标、炎症因子水平、心室率、临床疗效、药物不良反应展开分析。结果 ①组间心功能指标、炎症因子水平在治疗前无差异,P>0.05;观察组心功能指标、炎症因子水平在治疗后优于对照组,P<0.05;②组间心室率在治疗前无差异,P>0.05;观察组治疗后4 h、12 h、24 h心室率均低于对照组,P<0.05;③观察组5例无效(8.33%),对照组14例无效(23.33%),P<0.05;④观察组药物不良反应率(3.33%)与对照组药物不良反应率(5.00%)无差异,P>0.05。结论 在急诊抢救心衰伴快速房颤患者时采用胺碘酮,可以改善患者心功能、炎症反应、心室率,加之无明显不良反应,值得推广。

Objective To analyze the efficacy of emergency treatment with amiodarone and its influence on 24-hour ventricular rate in patients with heart failure and rapid atrial fibrillation. Methods From January 2017 to December 2020, 60 patients with heart failure and rapid atrial fibrillation who received emergency treatment and cedilanide treatment were selected as the control group, and 60 patients with heart failure and rapid atrial fibrillation who received emergency treatment and amiodarone treatment at the same period were selected as the observation group. Results ① There was no significant difference in cardiac function index and inflammatory factors level between the two groups before treatment, P>0.05.The cardiac function index and inflammatory factors level of the observation group were more improved than those of the control group after treatment, P<0.05. ② There was no significant difference in ventricular rate between the two groups before treatment, P>0.05.The ventricular rates of the observation group at 4 h, 12 h and 24 h after treatment were lower than those of the control group, P< 0.05. ③ Treatment for 5 cases (8.33%) in the observation group, 14 cases (23.33%) in the control group were ineffective, P<0.05. ④ There was no significant difference in the adverse drug reaction incidence between the observation group (3.33%) and the control group (5.00%), P>0.05. Conclusion Amiodarone could improve the cardiac function, inflammatory reaction and ventricular rate of patients with heart failure and rapid atrial fibrillation in emergency treatment, and there was no obvious adverse reaction, so it is worthy of promotion.

目的 探讨市区院前急救流行病学特征,为制定院前急救策略和合理调配急救资源提供参考依据。方法 采用回顾性资料收集方法选取我院2013—2014年院前急救患者14000例(对照组),2017年院前急救患者9 630例(观察组)作为研究对象,对两组的性别、年龄、死亡原因等建立数据库,采用描述性研究和圆形分布方法进行统计分析,并对比两组数据,分析院前急救患者变化趋势。结果 对照组急救患者性别男性所占比例高于女性,年龄45~55岁所占比例最高,死亡原因创伤所占比例最高,心脑血管疾病其次;观察组急救患者性别男性所占比例高于女性,但低于对照组男性所占比例,年龄45~55岁所占比例最高,但比例低于对照组,死亡原因创伤所占比例最高,心脑血管疾病其次。结论 根据院前急救时间分布规律合理调配急救资源,充分发挥院前急救功能,提高院前急救水平。