Without Mouth-to-Mouth, CPR Still Works

New York Times and AP ^ | 17 March 2007 | Staff

[shrinkermd]

Chest compressions — not mouth-to-mouth resuscitation — seem to be the key in helping someone recover from cardiac arrest, according to new research that further bolsters advice from heart experts.

A study in Japan showed that people were more likely to recover without brain damage if rescuers focused on chest compressions rather than on rescue breaths, and some experts advised dropping the mouth-to-mouth part of CPR altogether. The study was published yesterday in The Lancet.

More than a year ago, the American Heart Association revised CPR guidelines to put more emphasis on chest presses, recommending 30 instead of 15 for every two breaths given. Stopping chest compressions to blow air into the lungs of someone who is unresponsive detracts from the more important task of keeping blood moving to provide oxygen and nourishment to the brain and heart.

Another big advantage to dropping the rescue breaths is that it could make bystanders more willing to provide CPR. Many are unwilling to do the mouth-to-mouth part, become flummoxed or are fearful of getting the ratio of breaths to chest compressions right in an emergency.

In the new study, researchers led by Dr. Ken Nagao of the Surugadai Nihon University Hospital in Tokyo analyzed 4,068 adult patients who had cardiac arrest witnessed by bystanders. Of those, 439 received only chest compressions, and 712 received conventional CPR.

Any CPR effort improved survival odds. But 22 percent of those who received just chest compressions survived with good neurological function compared with only 10 percent of those who received combination CPR.

“Eliminating the need for...

[shrinkermd]

?

[Sidebar Moderator]

I, and the rest of us in the back, are curious to see why you would post this under Editorial and Unclassified. Please note where I placed it.

[SoldierMedic]

In most business establishments and offices now are people trained in AED's. Where I work there is an AED not more than 100 feet from where I work.

CPR on it's own has little chance of saving you. However, if defib is given within the first one to two minutes of Ventricular Fibrillation, chances of survival are well above 80%.

Something to consider:

In NY, it takes EMS about 15 minutes to get to you. VF survival is about 5%. In Seattle, EMS take about 7 minutes, with a survival rate of about 30%. Rochester Minnesota has an EMS time of 6 minutes, and a VF survival rate of 43%.

[neverdem]

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders with chest compression only (SOS-KANTO): an observational study

I wish I understood why this is chat and not news. These mods are weird.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

A study in Japan showed that people were more likely to recover without brain damage if rescuers focused on chest compressions rather than on rescue breaths, and some experts advised dropping the mouth-to-mouth part of CPR altogether.

Good. With my luck, the life I try to save will be that of some big, ugly, hairy guy rather than a hot, Valerie Plame lookalike (yes, I think she's hot; whether she tells the truth is something else entirely).

[SunkenCiv]

That's how the training is now -- 30:1 compressions to breathing, and breathing is optional. It takes 10 compressions just to get blood into the heart.