O-Two Medical Technologies. Controlled Ventilation
R Review/Update
Compression only CPR (or Cardio-Cerebral Resuscitation)
and the importance of the provision of quality ventilations by BLS/ALS responders
Overview
The current push for the adoption of compression only or cardio-cerebral resuscitation (CCR) for lay person rescuers has gained some momentum in the market. The American Heart Association (AHA) has made clear statements about the use of CCR by those who are unwilling or unable to provide mouth to mouth ventilations1
However, the studies supporting CCR do not provide adequate scientific evidence of sufficient power to make recommendations for a change in the Guidelines. Certainly there are a number of studies that point out the negative aspects of CCR for a number of patient groups – unwitnessed arrest, asphyxial arrest, drowning etc. The studies undertaken to date also do not show improved survival with CCR over standard CPR. In fact some show a slightly lower survival rate with CCR3. In a 2017 Guidelines for CPR Update published in Circulation2 it is stated that: ”patients receiving continuous chest compressions had a lower rate of return of spontaneous circulation, worse 1-month survival (odds ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.73–0.78), and worse 1-month survival with good neurological outcome (odds ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.69–0.76) compared with those receiving CPR using a ratio of 30 compressions to 2 breaths”.
However, if the CCR method of providing resuscitation is used by lay persons, then the importance of providing good ventilations to remove the hypoxic and hypercapnic effects of CCR (created by no ventilations being provided by the lay person responders) falls squarely on the shoulders of those with a duty to respond – Fire Fighters, Police Officers and EMS personnel.
Discussion
While old technologies for ventilation used by responders generally fail to provide adequate ventilation, the adoption of new technologies to aid ventilations has been slow. Not only does technology create new devices to provide ever more sophisticated protocols to improve patient survival, it also creates devices that assist in the way in which everyday skills are applied. And yet, often despite a lack of high level clinical evidence, the former (and some might say more glamorous) technologies are often more readily adopted by the market than the latter. This is certainly true of ventilation where there appears to be a general overconfidence amongst healthcare providers that ventilations are being well performed and that they do not require any technological assistance in ventilating their patients. This is despite strong clinical evidence to the contrary5.
Conclusions
There are many new technologies that can assist healthcare workers in providing significantly better ventilations with less deleterious effects on the patient. If these technologies are not embraced then, where response times are greater than 5 minutes and the patient is not gasping, the detrimental effects of no ventilations being provided, while hopefully improving circulation, may not provide for improved survival rates and may even reduce the success levels still further if current research provides an accurate indication.
References
1. Hands-Only (Compression-Only) Cardio-pulmonary Resuscitation: A Call to Action for Bystander Response to Adults Who Experience Out-of-Hospital Sudden Cardiac Arrest. A Science Advisory for the Public; From the American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee: Michael R. Sayre, Robert A. Berg, et al. Circulation Mar 31, 2008;
2. American Heart Association Guidelines for CPR and ECC: Circulation Oct 2015.
3. Comparison of chest compression only and standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Singapore Marcus Eng Hock Ong, et al: Singapore General, KK Women’s and Children’s, National University, Alexandra and Changi General Hospitals, Singapore. Resuscitation (2008) 78, 119 - 126
4. “Hyperventilation-Induced Hypotension During Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation”: Aufderheide et al: Circulation April 27, 2004
-----------------------
Technical Bulletin
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- basic life support for healthcare providers
- february 22 2010
- ohsu letterhead three color
- chapter 3 lesson plan
- cpr houston acls pals first aid bls dallas austin
- general policies and procedures for nursing
- family presence during resuscitation u s department of
- hasc standardized emergency codes
- o two medical technologies controlled ventilation
Related searches
- ashrae 62 2 ventilation requirements table
- ashrae 62 1 ventilation spreadsheet
- mechanical ventilation weaning criteria
- ventilation weaning parameters
- mechanical ventilation weaning protocol
- pressure control ventilation for dummies
- ashrae 62 2 2016 ventilation requirements
- ashrae 62 2 ventilation calculator
- mechanical ventilation basics for nurses
- ventilation damper types
- mechanical ventilation icd 10
- mechanical ventilation coding guidelines