💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 2440.gmi captured on 2021-12-05 at 23:47:19. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-12-03)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Chest compression position in CPR Official guidelines show that 30 chest
compressions should be followed by two rescue breaths
Concentrating on chest compressions rather than mouth-to-mouth when giving
emergency resuscitation can produce better results, says research published in
The Lancet.
A study of 3,000 patients found that chest compressions alone increased chances
of survival by more than 22%.
But training in how to give both chest compressions and mouth-to-mouth breaths
is the best option, experts say.
The UK Resuscitation Council is due to produce new CPR guidelines next week.
Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a combination of chest compressions and
mouth-to-mouth breaths, given in a life-threatening emergency like a cardiac
arrest or heart attack.
The study, compiled by doctors from the Medical University of Vienna in
Austria, looked at the survival rates of people treated by untrained members of
the public taking instructions from the emergency services over the phone.
Continue reading the main story
Start Quote
If you're unwilling or unable to do full CPR then chest compressions are better
than nothing.
End Quote Dr Meng Aw-Yong St John Ambulance
Dr Peter Nagele, from the department of anaesthesiology, critical care and pain
therapy at the Medical University of Vienna, said that if untrained bystanders
avoided mouth-to-mouth breaths during CPR, they were more likely to perform
uninterrupted chest compressions.
That then increased the probability of CPR being successful.
Different techniques
The research in The Lancet involved two analyses.
The first used data from three randomised trials involving more than 3,000
patients.
It showed that chest-compression-only CPR was associated with a slightly
improved chance of survival compared with standard CPR (14% v 12%).
In the second analysis of seven observational studies, researchers found no
difference between the two CPR techniques.
The study authors maintain that continuous, uninterrupted chest compressions
are vital for successful CPR.
Dr Jas Soar, chair of the Resuscitation Council from Southmead Hospital in
Bristol, said: "Any CPR is better than no CPR. If you witness a cardiac arrest,
dial 999 immediately. Those trained in CPR should follow existing guidance of
30 chest compressions followed by two rescue breaths.
"Those not trained should start compressions and follow instructions until an
expert arrives," Dr Soar said.
Dr Meng Aw-Yong, medical adviser at St John Ambulance, acknowledged that rescue
breaths could be off-putting.
"The current advice is that if you're unwilling or unable to do full CPR then
chest compressions are better than nothing.
"The best solution, however, is for people to get trained in how to carry out
chest compressions and rescue breaths so they can be the difference between a
life lost and a life saved," he said.
The British Heart Foundation says that being able to do CPR more than doubles
the chances of survival.
Claire O'Neill, community resuscitation programme lead at the BHF, said: "For
someone who is untrained in cardiopulmonary resuscitation, doing both chest
compressions and rescue breaths really can be difficult.
"We also know that uninterrupted chest compressions are very important for
increasing the chance of survival. So being directed to focus solely on chest
compressions could make people more willing to attempt resuscitation, which
could ultimately save lives," she said.