Time to change CPR guidelines, cardiologist says
Although compressions-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was unveiled in 2003, after a decade of research, the American Heart Association still stops short of recommending it.
Two new studies, of 10,000 Swedish and 5,000 Japanese patients, who suffered a witnessed, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, show comparable rates of survival after compressions-only or compressions with mouth-to-mouth breathing.
Previous studies have shown better survival rates with compressions only. Additionally, cardiac researcher Gordon Ewy, M.D., notes that mouth-to-mouth breathing interrupts blood flow to the brain. Thus, compressions-only CPR minimizes brain damage.
“Millions of dollars and millions of hours” have been spent to teach traditional CPR worldwide, Ewy points out, although it works no better than chest compression only, at this point rarely taught and usually done by people with no training (Carla McClain, Ariz Daily Star 12/21/07).
“It is now time to change the guidelines,” he said (Circulation 2007;116:2894-2856).
Additional information:
Tags: CPR
January 6th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Do the Swedish and Japanese studies compare like subjects,
or could the patients who received only chest compression have been less critcally afflicted, more signs of consciousness and thus rejection of mouth to mouth assault?
January 8th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
What happened to the cardiopump, the external cardiopulmonary (big suction cup) gizmo providing both compression/expansion? FDA blocked clinical trials in the early 1990s, which CEI protested.
Rights to the thing were sold by the Ambu Co. of Holland to a US company, ResQCor, several years ago. Googling ResQCor only produces the Ambu Co. document.