New Approach to CPR Eliminates The Need For Mouth to Mouth
June 12, 2007 by Kendra James, RN
Filed under Diseases & Conditions
* Chest compression alone nearly doubled the chances of a good neurological outcome in patients at greatest risk (those that stopped breathing, which accounted for 90 percent of those in the study).
* The good outcomes were most likely if the rescue attempt began within four minutes of the collapse.
* Mouth-to-mouth ventilation provided no real benefit.
* Those given compressions alone survived as often as those given traditional CPR (chest compressions plus rescue breaths).
What do you think about this? This follows new research that shows mouth to mouth is not necessary for survival of cardiac arrest. This was studied due to the fact that when an average bystander witnesses someone go down from cardiac arrest, they are not super psyched about swapping spit with the unknown.
This was reported in the Harvard Women’s Heath Watch, which stressed the background and importance of the development: This new approach isn’t widely known or usually taught to the public because, up to now, there hasn’t been enough evidence to achieve broad endorsement.
Researchers are now insisting that there is ample evidence that shows the “new” approach to be superior from a neurological point of view and will help provide more volunteers that will assist in cardiac resuscitation now that mouth to mouth is eliminated.
They do warn not to forget your traditional CPR for drowning victims and such. I personally carry a shield with me in my purse, so I can pop it over someones mouth if mouth to mouth is ever needed. I learned my lesson the hard way. After 10 minutes of administering CPR, the helpless bystander that I was resuscitating vomited in my mouth. Yeah, it was so gross, but he lived!
