CPR Using Chest Compression-Only Shows Long Term Benefits

Chest Compression Only CPR
Chest Compression Only CPR

In the US alone around 380,000 people suffers cardiac arrests and only about 10% survives.
In a recent study, a person who suffers cardiac arrest is unlikely will die in the coming years with bystanders performing CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) by compressions only. This backs an AHA (American Heart Association) endorsement that simple CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) technique is most suitable to bystanders who fears and believes that applying together chest compression techniques with the rescue breathing procedures may result for them to give no help to the victims at all. However the endorsements would not apply to Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation procedure performed in government institutions such as hospitals or in any community health centers performed by medical professionals or persons who are expert in standard rescue breathing techniques. And also, it only applies to adult and not to pediatric victims.
Dr. Roger White, an anesthesiologist and cardiac care specialist connected with the Mayo Clinic who was in the advisory group that penned the AHA’s statement said “we’re on the right track in 2008”. Way back in 2008, AHA said chest compression only was a choice to bystanders who have no proper training or are not confident enough in their skill to execute the compressions technique together with standard rescue breathing techniques because some people are apprehensive that sufferers of non-cardiac related events like blood clots in their lungs or drug overdoses may not acquire the required oxygen with compression only technique. But in the study, the authors opined that, “significantly, we didn’t detect any indication of impairment among those to whom ventilation and oxygenation may possibly in theory supplementary essential” in such cases by way of non-cardiac or an un-witnessed cardiac arrest.
In such cases, there is the likelihood that a victim’s blood still has some oxygen remains once a victim’s heart stopped functioning in a short time and that the chest compression-only procedure can still dispense it to major organs of the body, unless if that person was down in a considerable length of time or an un-known length of time, then it’s more possible that the person will need oxygen by means of rescue breathing, Dr. White said.
Dr. White has no connection of the recent study, though.
The study comes from the two random trials from around 3,200 adults whose cases of cardiac arrests were possibly due to heart complications rather that trauma, suffocation or drowning that were published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2010. Dispatchers on these cases instructed bystanders through phone to execute either the standard CPR or compression-only CPR. The authors of this new study come from Sweden, Seattle and France were able to follow-up on long terms effects for 78% of those adult participants.
A 1 year survival rate, according to Dr. Florence Dumas, an author of the study, is around 12% for compression-only and around 10% for compression with rescue breathing. After fine-tuning the different parameters, mortality rate in the chest compression-only was 9% lower compared to the standard CPR group and the survival advantage continued for over 5 years, as shown in the results available in the journal’s circulation.
So, in the end it suggests that potential short term resulting differences do render significant long term public health benefits.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s