Hands-only CPR, pushy dispatchers are lifesavers

FILE - In this Sept. 15, 2006 file photo a person participates in an American Red Cross CPR training in Washington. Two new studies conclude that "han AP – FILE - In this Sept. 15, 2006 file photo a person participates in an American Red Cross CPR training …

ATLANTA – More bystanders are willing to attempt CPR if an emergency dispatcher gives them firm and direct instructions — especially if they can just press on the chest and skip the mouth-to-mouth, according to new research.

The two new studies conclude that "hands-only" chest compression is enough to save a life. They are the largest and most rigorous yet to suggest that breathing into a victim's mouth isn't needed in most cases.

The American Heart Association has been promoting hands-only CPR for two years, though it's not clear how much it's caught on. The new studies should encourage dispatchers and bystanders to be more aggressive about using the simpler technique.

"That could translate into hundreds if not thousands of additional lives saved each year. What are we waiting for?" said Dr. Arthur Kellermann, a RAND Corporation expert on emergency medicine.

An estimated 310,000 Americans die each year of cardiac arrest outside hospitals or in emergency rooms. Only about 6 percent of those who are stricken outside a hospital survive.

When someone collapses and stops breathing, many people panic and believe that phoning 911 is the best they can do to help.

The larger of the two new studies reported survival rates of about 12 percent when bystanders did dispatcher-directed CPR, confirming earlier research that on-scene CPR can dramatically increase a victim's odds of survival.

The studies also spotlighted the importance of having forceful dispatchers coaching bystanders, said Dr. Michael Sayre, an Ohio State University emergency medicine specialist who helped update the Heart Association guidelines on CPR.

Previous research has suggested that adults who need CPR get it only about one-quarter to one-third of the time when bystanders are around.

One of the new studies found that when dispatchers told callers to start CPR, about 80 percent attempted it when given hands-only instructions, more than the 70 percent who tried the standard version.

Sayre and others credited the increase on dispatchers who immediately told callers what to do, instead of first asking them if they'd had CPR training or if they'd be willing to try it until medical help arrives.

"This study shows that with great training and motivation, the 911 call taker can make a big difference," Sayre said.

CPR, or cardiopulmonary resuscitation, is a technique that's been in use for about 50 years. The standard version now calls for alternating 30 hard pushes on a victim's chest with two quick breaths into their mouth.

The aim of CPR is to do some of the mechanical work of the heart by forcing at least some blood and oxygen to the brain and other vital organs.

Experts have come to believe that pumping is what's most important in most adult cases, and advise doing chest pushes continually at a rate of 100 per minute and skipping the mouth-to-mouth. Some suggest using the beat of the old disco song "Stayin' Alive" as a guide.

Cardiac patients do as well or better when they got hands-only CPR as compared to the traditional version, these and earlier studies have found.

One of the new studies, carried out in London and the Seattle area, involved more than 1,900 people who witnessed someone in cardiac arrest and called 911 or some other emergency number. Emergency dispatchers instructed callers to do either hands-only CPR or an older form of standard CPR that alternates 15 pushes with two quick breaths.

The second study was done in Sweden and included nearly 1,300 people.

In both studies, there was no significant difference in the survival rates of people who got conventional CPR and those who got the hands-only version.

The studies are being published in Thursday's New England Journal of Medicine.

While there is no good national data on how often hands-only CPR is used, Dr. Ben Bobrow, who directs the Arizona Department of Health Services' emergency medical system, believes it is catching on.

"We've seen a huge trend in hands-only CPR in Arizona and I believe that trend is spreading across the country. I think these findings will further promote that," he said.

Many people think of traditional CPR as difficult, and to some extent it is. The victim's head has to be tilted back, the airway cleared, the nose pinched and the mouth completely covered with the rescuer's. A lot of people have trouble with it, said Don Pederson, a dispatcher in Seattle's King County, who participated in the U.S. study.

"A lot of the times they weren't getting air in there correctly," with oxygen escaping out the sides of the mouth, Pederson said.

Rea and his colleagues believe some bystanders perform mouth-to-mouth so poorly that the interruption reduces blood flow.

Worry about doing CPR correctly was the No. 2 reason many people don't attempt it, according to a Michigan study published in 2006. The No. 1 reason? People are too panicked.

The "ick" factor of putting lips to a stranger's mouth — and picking up the stranger's germs — was cited by only a tiny fraction of people in the study. However, it may be a more significant issue than the study showed, at least in some communities, experts say.

Traditional CPR is still the preferred form of resuscitation for children or adults who have stopped breathing because of choking, drowning or other respiratory problems.

___

Online:

New England Journal: http://www.nejm.org

Follow Yahoo! News on , become a fan on

175 Comments

  • 0 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 0 users disliked this comment
    Dee Mon Aug 02, 2010 06:29 pm PDT Report Abuse
    So is this hands only cpr, ok, does it save lives, who started this hands only cpr, i have never heard of it before
  • 0 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 1 users disliked this comment
    BMan Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:54 am PDT Report Abuse
    To Surginurse123, you said "OMG i cannot believe someone actually published this crap as a valid study!! can tell you THIS IS RANTINGS OF A IDIOT!!!"

    Have you read the study itself, not just this popularized report of the study? Do you know anything about how it was done, the parameters examined, etc.? No? I'm not surprised. These "RANTINGS OF A IDIOT" apparently made it through the peer-review process of one of the medical profession's most prestigious journals, but you dismiss the study (without having looked at it) based on your own conjecture. Have you personally done any studies (or even heard of any) that measure the difference in the amount of oxygen circulating in standard CPR versus hands-only CPR, or are you just spouting a bunch of assumptions and speculations without actually bothering to think or investigate?

    Your critique is irresponsible. I hope your nursing is based on something more substantial and scientifically grounded than your own hypotheses; otherwise I fear for your patients.
  • 1 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 0 users disliked this comment
    RANDY Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:18 am PDT Report Abuse
    If it saves lives, great, But I have taken CPR about a million times, and I have never heard of not doing breaths. But I guess if someone is freaked out about doing the breaths, then at least this is something. I carry a breathing applicator with me in my car so i have no prob doing the breathing since I will not touch the person's mouth with this . But since I am a nurse, id still do CPR and rescue breathing even without it. And I have, a number of times.
  • 2 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 0 users disliked this comment
    Conor Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:01 am PDT Report Abuse
    Two points in reply to above. One, CPR is ONLY done on a person with no heartbeat and no breathing. That means they are DEAD!! Therefore giving CPR cannot make the situation worse, they are dead and stay dead. So its "not saving a life", its "bringing someone back to life." Only good can come from CPR. So no one can further harm a person by giving CPR. Secondly, we breathe out 16% oxygen and a raised CO2 level of approx 4%. This is in fact good because there is still plenty of oxygen available and the CO2 stimulates the bodies respiration. So have a go as its a win win situation.
  • 1 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 0 users disliked this comment
    Johnny .45 Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:18 am PDT Report Abuse
    They did a "study" on 1,300 people to see how many died from one type of CPR vs another? LOL, I'd have to assume that means they did a CASE study, by reviewing 1,300 emergency-response records. Because otherwise, what do you do, divide 1,300 volunteers up into "hands-only CPR", "traditional CPR" and "No CPR" groups, initiate cardiac arrest and see what happens?
    "Surginurse123"...they're not necessarily saying that this is the BEST way to do CPR, just that it's better than NO CPR. First, they DID mention that in choking/drowing cases mouth-to-mouth is best. Second, if the airways are unobstructed, the "pumping" motion not only circulates the blood, but causes the lungs to expand and contract as well. That little motion is enough to exhale and inhale a slight amount of oxygen...not a lot, but probably more oxygen than the slight CPR-induced blood circulation can carry. Even a tiny amount of oxygen in the bloodstream can mean the difference between life and death, and even brain damage...the brain can survive on even a tiny amount of air, a lot better than it can without any air.
    So, in an ideal world everyone would know how to use mouth-to-mouth and wouldn't be afraid to do it...they're just saying that in cardiac-arrest cases, the pumping is 90% of the "trick". It's better to have someone who's not willing to kiss me pump on my chest for a while than to have them say "I'm not putting my mouth on his!" and standing and watching me die because they figure if there's no mouth-to-mouth, they might as well not even bother.
    Plus, any article that brings CPR up is a good article. People don't think about these things until it's too late...if they have ANY knowledge of how to perform CPR, even badly, it might save a life. It's probably not going to KILL anyone.
    I'd say the real problem is that no-one wants to get involved. If I save an elderly man having a heart-attack on the way home from work, I'll probably have to wait around while the emergency responders show up, and make a statement to the cops, and the sharks...sorry, I mean "reporters", etc, and not get home until late and probably get yelled at by the wife, or whatever. This is America, land of apathy. "Oh look...that guy's having a heart attack. I hope someone will stop and help him. Oh not, ME, I have to get home and have supper. But what's wrong with all THOSE people, why don't THEY stop and help, those selfish jerks."
  • 2 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 0 users disliked this comment
    surginurse123 Sun Aug 01, 2010 07:36 am PDT Report Abuse
    As as a critical care cardio-vascular, heart nurse of 24 years experience, OMG i cannot believe someone actually published this crap as a valid study!! can tell you THIS IS RANTINGS OF A IDIOT!!! WITHOUT OXYGEN IN THE BODY CIRCULATING TO ALL ORGANS, ESPECIALLY THE BRAIN, YOU'RE WASTING YOUR TIME AND EFFORT.. and certaintly doesn't help the victim at all...without oxygen the body doesn't survive and without artifical respirations the oxygen can't get into the organs, especially the brain, and what do you have brain anoxia (dead brain for lack of oxygen, so oxygen is the important key, YOU CAN'T HAVE ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER..can you drive a car without gas? can you operate an electrical device without electricity, I THINK NOT...so don't accept this!! its absolutely not true.... there are ways to give respirations without touching the skin LOOK IT UP AND HELP SOMEONE TO LIVE...there's no greater high than saving a life!!!
  • 0 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 0 users disliked this comment
    Stephen Sun Aug 01, 2010 06:17 am PDT Report Abuse
    So would risk AIDS/HIV or STDs to give mouth-to-mouth to a stranger?

    Alternately, for those who have such diseases -- would you prefer not to infect someone rather than receive mouth-to-mouth?
  • 0 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 0 users disliked this comment
    Stephen Sun Aug 01, 2010 06:16 am PDT Report Abuse
    So would risk AIDS/HIV or STDs to give mouth-to-mouth to a stranger?

    Alternately, for those who have such diseases -- would you prefer not to infect someone rather than receive mouth-to-mouth?
  • 0 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 0 users disliked this comment
    James Sat Jul 31, 2010 08:39 pm PDT Report Abuse
    Anyone ever thought about to do when a person is a larygectomee? There is no oxygen mask over the mouth and nose. Why? A larygectomee is a "neck breather". Read up on this. I've been a lary for five years.
  • 1 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 0 users disliked this comment
    giang Sat Jul 31, 2010 05:45 am PDT Report Abuse
    Years ago I was confident of my CPR (started in the 60s with Hogan nelson/sylvester.) Later the ABC tilt head, chest compression and breathes I found (if I have not been doing it regularly on dummy) I would feel faint after 5 minutes. Now I am 70 (with back problem) have not updated myself with the new technique as I believe the usual method will cause me to have heart attack.If the hands only compression is as effective why not train people on this new technique. They must know the spot to put down their palms (left over right or vice versa). Whether elbows need to be locked as I usually saw the performer bouncing (frown upon) when performing. The amount of pressure on the chest is also important as too much pressure may cause more harm than good. Would appreciate if you could add a vedeo display on the steps of performing hands only CPR. Thank you

Post a Comment

Sign in to post a comment, or Sign up for a free account.