eprintid: 72 rev_number: 8 eprint_status: archive userid: 2 importid: 0 dir: disk0/00/00/00/72 datestamp: 2021-05-31 14:17:18 lastmod: 2022-03-03 23:55:07 status_changed: 2021-05-31 14:17:18 type: article succeeds: 0 commentary: 0 metadata_visibility: show item_issues_count: 0 sword_depositor: 0 creators_name: Barcala-Furelos, Roberto creators_name: Szpilman, David creators_name: Palacios-Aguilar, Jose creators_name: Costas-Veiga, Javier creators_name: Abelairas-Gomez, Cristian creators_name: Bores-Cerezal, Antonio creators_name: López-García, Sergio creators_name: Rodríguez-Nuñez, Antonio creators_id: creators_id: creators_id: creators_id: javier.costas@uneatlantico.es creators_id: cristian.abelairas@uneatlantico.es creators_id: antonio.bores@uneatlantico.es creators_id: creators_id: title: Assessing the efficacy of rescue equipment in lifeguard resuscitation efforts for drowning ispublished: pub subjects: uneat_dp divisions: uneatlantico_produccion_cientifica full_text_status: none abstract: Purpose The whole drowning process usually occurs within seconds to a few minutes. An early rescue may stop and/or prevent most medical complications. Fins, rescue tube, and rescue board (RB) are the equipment most frequently used by lifeguards. Our objective was to compare, in a water rescue quasiexperimental trial, these different pieces of rescue equipment to define the safest and with the lower rescue time as well as to assess their effects on the lifeguards' physiological state and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performance. Method A controlled trial was conducted to study the time effect of 4 different rescue techniques and assess CPR quality, along with the physiological effects of each rescue technique (blood lactate and subjective Borg's scale effort perception) on 35 lifeguards. Results Among the final sample subjects (n = 23), a total of 92 rescues were completed. Total water rescue time was longer without equipment (NE). The total rescue time was significantly lower using RB (P < .001). Similar good quality of CPR before and after water rescue was observed in all trials (P > .05), although correct ventilations represented less than 50% of total in all trials. Blood lactate increased after all rescues. The subjective effort Borg's scale showed significantly less effort using RB vs without equipment, fins, and fins and rescue tube. Conclusion The use of propelling and/or floating equipment saves precious time with repercussions in the reduction of drowning mortality and morbidity. The RB offers a significant advantage. Lifeguards need more CPR training, especially considering the importance of efficient ventilations for drowning victims. date: 2016 date_type: published publication: The American Journal of Emergency Medicine volume: 34 number: 3 pagerange: 480-485 pages: 0 id_number: doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2015.12.006 refereed: TRUE issn: 0735-6757 official_url: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2015.12.006 num_pieces: 0 gscholar_impact: 0 gscholar_datestamp: 0000-00-00 00:00:00 access: close language: en citation: Artículo Materias > Educación física y el deporte Universidad Europea del Atlántico > Investigación > Producción Científica Cerrado Inglés Purpose The whole drowning process usually occurs within seconds to a few minutes. An early rescue may stop and/or prevent most medical complications. Fins, rescue tube, and rescue board (RB) are the equipment most frequently used by lifeguards. Our objective was to compare, in a water rescue quasiexperimental trial, these different pieces of rescue equipment to define the safest and with the lower rescue time as well as to assess their effects on the lifeguards' physiological state and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performance. Method A controlled trial was conducted to study the time effect of 4 different rescue techniques and assess CPR quality, along with the physiological effects of each rescue technique (blood lactate and subjective Borg's scale effort perception) on 35 lifeguards. Results Among the final sample subjects (n = 23), a total of 92 rescues were completed. Total water rescue time was longer without equipment (NE). The total rescue time was significantly lower using RB (P < .001). Similar good quality of CPR before and after water rescue was observed in all trials (P > .05), although correct ventilations represented less than 50% of total in all trials. Blood lactate increased after all rescues. The subjective effort Borg's scale showed significantly less effort using RB vs without equipment, fins, and fins and rescue tube. Conclusion The use of propelling and/or floating equipment saves precious time with repercussions in the reduction of drowning mortality and morbidity. The RB offers a significant advantage. Lifeguards need more CPR training, especially considering the importance of efficient ventilations for drowning victims. metadata Barcala-Furelos, Roberto; Szpilman, David; Palacios-Aguilar, Jose; Costas-Veiga, Javier; Abelairas-Gomez, Cristian; Bores-Cerezal, Antonio; López-García, Sergio y Rodríguez-Nuñez, Antonio mail SIN ESPECIFICAR, SIN ESPECIFICAR, SIN ESPECIFICAR, javier.costas@uneatlantico.es, cristian.abelairas@uneatlantico.es, antonio.bores@uneatlantico.es, SIN ESPECIFICAR, SIN ESPECIFICAR (2016) Assessing the efficacy of rescue equipment in lifeguard resuscitation efforts for drowning. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 34 (3). pp. 480-485. ISSN 0735-6757