Experts Now Recommend Hands-Only CPR

NEW YORK — You can skip the mouth-to-mouth breathing and just press on the chest to save a life. In a major change, the American Heart Association said Monday that hands-only CPR _ rapid, deep presses on the victim's chest until help arrives _ works just as well as standard CPR for sudden cardiac arrest in adults.

Experts hope bystanders will now be more willing to jump in and help if they see someone suddenly collapse. Hands-only CPR is simpler and easier to remember and removes a big barrier for people skittish about the mouth-to-mouth breathing.

"You only have to do two things. Call 911 and push hard and fast on the middle of the person's chest," said Dr. Michael Sayre, an emergency medicine professor at Ohio State University who headed the committee that made the recommendation.

Hands-only CPR calls for uninterrupted chest presses _ 100 a minute _ until paramedics take over or an automated external defibrillator is available to restore a normal heart rhythm.

This action should be taken only for adults who unexpectedly collapse, stop breathing and are unresponsive. The odds are that the person is having cardiac arrest _ the heart suddenly stops _ which can occur after a heart attack or be caused by other heart problems. In such a case, the victim still has ample air in the lungs and blood and compressions keep blood flowing to the brain, heart and other organs.

A child who collapses is more likely to primarily have breathing problems _ and in that case, mouth-to-mouth breathing should be used. That also applies to adults who suffer lack of oxygen from a near-drowning, drug overdose, or carbon monoxide poisoning. In these cases, people need mouth-to-mouth to get air into their lungs and bloodstream.

But in either case, "Something is better than nothing," Sayre said.

The CPR guidelines had been inching toward compression-only. The last update, in 2005, put more emphasis on chest pushes by alternating 30 presses with two quick breaths; those "unable or unwilling" to do the breaths could do presses alone.

Story continues below

advertisement

Now the heart association has given equal standing to hands-only CPR. Those who have been trained in traditional cardiopulmonary resuscitation can still opt to use it.

Sayre said the association took the unusual step of making the changes now _ the next update wasn't due until 2010 _ because three studies last year showed hands-only was as good as traditional CPR. Hands-only will be added to CPR training.

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, although rates vary by location. People who quickly get CPR while awaiting medical treatment have double or triple the chance of surviving. But less than a third of victims get this essential help.

Dr. Gordon Ewy, who's been pushing for hands-only CPR for 15 years, said he was "dancing in the streets" over the heart association's change even though he doesn't think it goes far enough. Ewy (pronounced AY-vee) is director of the University of Arizona Sarver Heart Center in Tucson, where the compression-only technique was pioneered.

Ewy said there's no point to giving early breaths in the case of sudden cardiac arrest, and it takes too long to stop compressions to give two breaths _ 16 seconds for the average person. He noted that victims often gasp periodically anyway, drawing in a little air on their own.

Anonymous surveys show that people are reluctant to do mouth-to-mouth, Ewy said, partly because of fear of infections.

"When people are honest, they're not going to do it," he said. "It's not only the yuck factor."

In recent years, emergency service dispatchers have been coaching callers in hands-only CPR rather than telling them how to alternate breaths and compressions.

"They love it. It's less complicated and the outcomes are better," said Dallas emergency medical services chief Dr. Paul Pepe, who also chairs emergency medicine at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.

One person who's been spreading the word about hands-only CPR is Temecula, Calif., chiropractor Jared Hjelmstad, who helped save the life of a fellow health club member in Southern California

Hjelmstad, 40, had read about it in a medical journal and used it on Garth Goodall, who collapsed while working out at their gym in February. Hjelmstad's 15-year-old son Josh called 911 in the meantime.

Hjelmstad said he pumped on Goodall's chest for more than 12 minutes _ encouraged by Goodall's intermittent gasps _ until paramedics arrived. He was thrilled to find out the next day that Goodall had survived.

On Sunday, he visited Goodall in the hospital where he is recovering from triple bypass surgery.

"After this whole thing happened, I was on cloud nine," said Hjelmstad. "I was just fortunate enough to be there."

Goodall, a 49-year-old construction contractor, said he had been healthy and fit before the collapse, and there'd been no hint that he had clogged heart arteries.

"I was lucky," he said. Had the situation been reversed, "I wouldn't have known what to do."

"It's a second lease on life," he added.

___

On the Net:

Heart Association: http://www.americanheart.org/handsonlycpr

Sarver Heart Center: http://www.heart.arizona.edu/

Comments

[Macready]

This is what we were told on my last first aid course . .. "mouth to mouth" is not effective

[wmbear]

DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU'RE USING IT FOR.... I've always found "mouth-to-mouth" extremely effective!

[djg55555]

Yes, I'd read that this is especially true in a drowning case. I'd heard that you shouldn't go for the mouth to mouth right away because it's possible that the victim might have water in their lungs and performing mouth to mouth will cause more damage by forcing the water back into the lungs. I'd heard that chest compressions are preferred at least until you are sure that the lungs are clear.

[nastyvirus]

Did you say...MacReady?!?!?

In that case, you must watch out for the teeth on the victim's abdomen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TevQS4qgE_Q&feature=related

They are itchy.

[totalliberal]

As a part of my job I have to take advanced courses in medical emergency, including drug applications an wound closures. I asked my instructor about this and was informed that both are necessary. When I told him I'd seen the chest compression only system work perfectly well, I got a lot of humma, humma from him.

[TXfemmom]

You mean that for thirty years we have been placing our health in jeopardy, and doing patients and individuals we encountered no good by doing mouth to mouth? I was Advanced Cardiac Life Support qualified for years, and every time I had the darned class and test, I used to complain that they needed to do some legitimate study to determine if the compression and mechanical compressions performed were providing enough movement of air into and out of the respiratory system, with the resulting intrathoracic pressures generated, to provide the oxygen and it was a matter of establishing and continuing circulation which was more important. I had the instructors and teachers scream at me and say that their techniques were ABSOLUTELY SCIENTIFICALLY THE BEST.

Well, now we know that they were not. One of my students, which whom I had shared my thoughts on this matter called me a short time ago and reminded me of our conversations on this matter in 1992, laughing, and saying it just took them sixteen more years to come around to what you were saying would be best. It is great to be right, somewhat, but think of all the lives which have been lost in all those years, in which the "people in charge" failed to do the scientific study to answer the question I asked then, and I am certain many others asked many years ago, and all along, as well?