K-1 Yongquan complementary resuscitation maneuver, systematized since 1987, has been consistently performed in sudden death and cardiac arrest conditions as a final resource in both basic and advanced CPR failure. Exp...K-1 Yongquan complementary resuscitation maneuver, systematized since 1987, has been consistently performed in sudden death and cardiac arrest conditions as a final resource in both basic and advanced CPR failure. Experimental analytical studies identify the prevention, control and assessment of treatments set up as well as the determination of their efficiency offering;in that way, there are more possibilities than risks during the trial period. That type of study refers to the random criterion in order to measure differences and, in that way, it establishes causal associations which may better determine the intervention mechanism. As inferred by this criterion, control groups would not profit from the benefit of providing a second chance by means of the proposed maneuver during rescue. Such determination leaves those included in the control group deserted to their own ill-fate, adding—consequently—a certain lethal risk, which should basic and advanced CPR fail. In view of this panorama, we tried to find a methodology that should ensure the validation process according to the model presented;to that end, we propose the Cohort Retrospective Study. All of the above has given evidence that there is a difference if one takes into consideration as control the group of “deceased patients” instead of considering among them “patients that may be deceased”. Such apparently simple consideration—thanks to the Cohort Retrospective model—manages to efface the high possibility of a “fatal damage”, as proposed by the randomness principle upon a prospective non-intervention group. Beyond the scientific methodology that supports it the efficiency of the maneuver derives mainly from the sustained increase in survival rates presented in the successive statistics published since its application.展开更多
文摘K-1 Yongquan complementary resuscitation maneuver, systematized since 1987, has been consistently performed in sudden death and cardiac arrest conditions as a final resource in both basic and advanced CPR failure. Experimental analytical studies identify the prevention, control and assessment of treatments set up as well as the determination of their efficiency offering;in that way, there are more possibilities than risks during the trial period. That type of study refers to the random criterion in order to measure differences and, in that way, it establishes causal associations which may better determine the intervention mechanism. As inferred by this criterion, control groups would not profit from the benefit of providing a second chance by means of the proposed maneuver during rescue. Such determination leaves those included in the control group deserted to their own ill-fate, adding—consequently—a certain lethal risk, which should basic and advanced CPR fail. In view of this panorama, we tried to find a methodology that should ensure the validation process according to the model presented;to that end, we propose the Cohort Retrospective Study. All of the above has given evidence that there is a difference if one takes into consideration as control the group of “deceased patients” instead of considering among them “patients that may be deceased”. Such apparently simple consideration—thanks to the Cohort Retrospective model—manages to efface the high possibility of a “fatal damage”, as proposed by the randomness principle upon a prospective non-intervention group. Beyond the scientific methodology that supports it the efficiency of the maneuver derives mainly from the sustained increase in survival rates presented in the successive statistics published since its application.
