Effectiveness of Bystander-Initiated Cardiac-Only Resuscitation for Patients With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Author:

Iwami Taku1,Kawamura Takashi1,Hiraide Atsushi1,Berg Robert A.1,Hayashi Yasuyuki1,Nishiuchi Tatsuya1,Kajino Kentaro1,Yonemoto Naohiro1,Yukioka Hidekazu1,Sugimoto Hisashi1,Kakuchi Hiroyuki1,Sase Kazuhiro1,Yokoyama Hiroyuki1,Nonogi Hiroshi1

Affiliation:

1. From the Division of Cardiology, National Cardiovascular Center, Suita, Japan (T.I., H. Yokoyama, H.N.); Kyoto University Health Service, Kyoto, Japan (T.K.); Center for Medical Education, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan (A.H.); Sarver Heart Center, University of Arizona, College of Medicine, Tucson (R.A.B.); Senri Critical Care Medical Center, Osaka Saiseikai Senri Hospital, Suita, Japan (Y.H.); Osaka Prefectural Senshu Critical Care Medical Center, Izumisano, Japan (T.N....

Abstract

Background— Previous animal and clinical studies suggest that bystander-initiated cardiac-only resuscitation may be superior to conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. Our hypothesis was that both cardiac-only bystander resuscitation and conventional bystander CPR would improve outcomes from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of ≤15 minutes’ duration, whereas the addition of rescue breathing would improve outcomes for cardiac arrests lasting >15 minutes. Methods and Results— We carried out a prospective, population-based, observational study involving consecutive patients with emergency responder resuscitation attempts from May 1, 1998, through April 30, 2003. The primary outcome measure was 1-year survival with favorable neurological outcome. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between type of CPR and outcomes. Among the 4902 witnessed cardiac arrests, 783 received conventional CPR, and 544 received cardiac-only resuscitation. Excluding very-long-duration cardiac arrests (>15 minutes), the cardiac-only resuscitation yielded a higher rate of 1-year survival with favorable neurological outcome than no bystander CPR (4.3% versus 2.5%; odds ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.01 to 2.95), and conventional CPR showed similar effectiveness (4.1%; odds ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.95 to 2.60). For the very-long-duration arrests, neurologically favorable 1-year survival was greater in the conventional CPR group, but there were few survivors regardless of the type of bystander CPR (0.3% [2 of 624], 0% [0 of 92], and 2.2% [3 of 139] in the no bystander CPR, cardiac-only CPR, and conventional CPR groups, respectively; P <0.05). Conclusions— Bystander-initiated cardiac-only resuscitation and conventional CPR are similarly effective for most adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. For very prolonged cardiac arrests, the addition of rescue breathing may be of some help.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Physiology (medical),Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3