New CPR Procedure

[Kaiser]

**broken link removed**

 

[Quad-smack]

I knew that one day this would become the standard. As long as the airway is open, the compressions still move some air.
I worked cardiac-rehab for years and know that unless you use an ambu-bag, that it is easy to get a bit overzealous and over-breathe the patient. Once the stomach is over-inflated with air, regurgitation is inevitable and then things just get complicated.
Now, let's see how long it will be before the AMA, AHA & Red Cross officially adopt this method.

 

[IRON37]

Good to know Kaiser. Seems like they change things up all the time now.

 

[gibbob2]

THe only problem with this is that they will need to restructure the basics being tough for everything else... like choking for example. The guideline to determine what is wrong for someone has always been to check A (airway) B (breathing) C (circulation). I used to teach this stiff back when the compression rate was 15 - 2. Then they bounced to 30 -1 with no circulation check, or reassessment after a certain amount of time.

THe best explanation I ever heard was comparing your heart to a well pump. You pump it once, hardly anything happens, keep pumping it, and eventually water (or blood) will make it all the way up (or through the body). As soon as you stop pumpin, the water drops back down the well (blood doesn't make it to the extremities). So it makes perfect sense to make the transition to more compressions and fewer breaths; but to completely getting rid of the breaths seems a bit iffy because once the blood oxygen is used up, you are just flowing useless blood around the body..... WIthout the breaths, you wont have any new oxygen.

ALl that to say, as long as people do SOMETHING, it doesn't make a difference if they follow new or old standards! JUST DO SOMETHING if you come across someone in need. And if you are worried about being sued, as soon as someone is unconscious, it is implied consent to help

 

[Philthy]

THe only problem with this is that they will need to restructure the basics being tough for everything else... like choking for example. The guideline to determine what is wrong for someone has always been to check A (airway) B (breathing) C (circulation). I used to teach this stiff back when the compression rate was 15 - 2. Then they bounced to 30 -1 with no circulation check, or reassessment after a certain amount of time.

THe best explanation I ever heard was comparing your heart to a well pump. You pump it once, hardly anything happens, keep pumping it, and eventually water (or blood) will make it all the way up (or through the body). As soon as you stop pumpin, the water drops back down the well (blood doesn't make it to the extremities). So it makes perfect sense to make the transition to more compressions and fewer breaths; but to completely getting rid of the breaths seems a bit iffy because once the blood oxygen is used up, you are just flowing useless blood around the body..... WIthout the breaths, you wont have any new oxygen.

ALl that to say, as long as people do SOMETHING, it doesn't make a difference if they follow new or old standards! JUST DO SOMETHING if you come across someone in need. And if you are worried about being sued, as soon as someone is unconscious, it is implied consent to help

Plus, that 500ml of residual air in the airway doesn't really move in or out.
Take a bunch of shallow breaths really fast and you still won't get fresh air.

 

[J_Diggs]

**broken link removed**

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. And I like the Occam's razor reference in your sig.

 

[ozman]

EMT Classes were pushing for this a year or so back

 

[kid1dakota]

The good thing about this also is that untrained people felt helpless and didn't attempt CPR.Now I think everyone will feel confident enough to just do the chest compressions. could save many lives.

 

[cecray3]

Yes, instead of cpr (cardio pulmonary resuscitation) it is now ccr (constant compression resuscitation). As a firefighter/EMT I can tell you this is considerably more effective. But let's face it...if someone gets to this point, there's a pretty damn good chance they're gonna die regardless!

 

[Userat204]

Good post. This is the American Heart Associations recommendation. I believe the other group(cant remember name) still teaches rescue breathing. AHA has been teaching compression without rescue breathing for about a year now. There have been numerous studies and this is really the way to go. I can speak from experience that this makes all the difference when it comes to maintaining brain function with a person who is out for any amount of time. Very good change and to be honest most people shy away from CPR because of rescue breathing. Just a warning for anyone who has never had to do CPR, if you do be prepared to hear and feel ribs cracking but remember it's necessary to save a life.

 

[ManoftheWorld]

100 BPM is no joke... no disrespect to some our more established (older) guys but referencing the Beegee's..... nothing a little more contemporary? LOL

 

[Kaladryn]

I'm guessing Dalton's Law has a lot to do with how oxygen can move into the lungs without breaths assuming the airway is open.

 

[The Booger]

100 BPM is no joke...

It certainly isn't. Try doing that at an odd angle on some of these LARGE people. You'll find that more than 2-3 minutes of this and you need a break. CPR (CCR) is hard work.

I'm sort of glad they went to this. So many people, including myself, would NEVER put their mouth on or near a strangers. So while they are figuring if they should or shouldn't give breaths, the person is dying.

Pushing on someone's chest hard and fast is totally different than giving breaths, which I think MANY more people would be willing to do (until they break a person's rib.......then they'll freak........I did).

It's a positive step forward. Even bad CPR is better than no CPR.

 

[willylee]

Good post. This is the American Heart Associations recommendation. I believe the other group(cant remember name) still teaches rescue breathing.

That would be American Red Cross. They are also switching over to the new protocols. Alot of the changes are having to do with simplicity for the public as well as trying to correct negative acid base changes that occur with professional rescue CPR. They don't call it practicing medicine for nothing.

 

[kid1dakota]

It certainly isn't. Try doing that at an odd angle on some of these LARGE people. You'll find that more than 2-3 minutes of this and you need a break. CPR (CCR) is hard work.

I'm sort of glad they went to this. So many people, including myself, would NEVER put their mouth on or near a strangers. So while they are figuring if they should or shouldn't give breaths, the person is dying.

Pushing on someone's chest hard and fast is totally different than giving breaths, which I think MANY more people would be willing to do (until they break a person's rib.......then they'll freak........I did).

It's a positive step forward. Even bad CPR is better than no CPR.

It is hard work but you appear to have had some training so you know that rocking at the hips and not pushing with arms only makes a HUGE difference in the fatique factor.Even a little girl or small man when rocking using bodyweight can last if done properly.

 

[TractionIssues]

This is pretty funny because I JUST got back from my 2 days class of the new CPR in a work environment, and this is what they taught. A bit different from the way they taugh it in the military about 7 years back.

 

[dragonfire101]

Ya just got re-certified and even with the 2 breaths its 30 compressions and you start compressions first.