Skills of lay people in checking the carotid pulse

Bahr, J.; Klingler, H.; Panzer, W.; Rode, H; Kettler, D.

doi:10.1016/s0300-9572(96)01092-1

Cited by 171 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, the BCPR duration and the interval between arrest witness and BCPR initiation were shorter for ventilation-only BCPR. Therefore, it is likely that educated bystanders who have strong will to save the victims but insufficient skill in checking the pulse [25] perform ventilation-only BCPR. It has been shown that healthcare providers also have difficulty in pulse detection [26,27].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of bystander-performed ventilation on functional outcomes after cardiac arrest and factors associated with ventilation-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A large observational study

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To determine the effectiveness of ventilations in bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (BCPR) and to identify the factors associated with ventilation-only BCPR.Methods: From out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) data prospectively collected from 2005 to 2011 in Japan, we extracted data for 210,134 bystander-witnessed OHCAs with complete datasets but no prehospital involvement of physician [no BCPR, 115,733;2,093; 61,075; and conventional (compressions + ventilations) BCPR, 31,233] and determined the factors associated with 1-month neurologically favourable survival using simple and multivariable logistic regression analyses. In 91,885 patients with known BCPR durations, we determined the factors associated with ventilation-only BCPR.Results: The rate of survival in the no BCPR, ventilation-only, compression-only and conventional group was 2.8%, 3.9%, 4.5% and 5.0%, respectively. After adjustment for other factors associated with outcomes, the survival rate in the ventilation-only group was higher than that in the no BCPR group (adjusted OR; 95% CI, 1.29; 1.01-1.63), but lower than that in the compression-only (0.76; 0.59-0.96) or conventional groups (0.70; 0.55-0.89). Conventional CPR had the highest OR for survival in almost all OHCA subgroups. The adjusted OR (95% CI) for survival after dividing BCPR into ventilation and compression components were 1.19 (1.11-1.27) and 1.60 (1.51-1.69), respectively. Older guidelines, female sex, younger patient age, bystander-initiated CPR without instruction, early BCPR and short BCPR duration were associated with ventilation-only BCPR.Conclusions: Ventilation is a significant component of BCPR, but alone is less effective than compression in improving neurologically favourable survival after OHCAs.Word count: 247

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of bystander-performed ventilation on functional outcomes after cardiac arrest and factors associated with ventilation-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A large observational study

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[115][116][117][118] Laymen have even more difficulty in verifying whether there is a pulse. 119 Laymen should not check for the absence of a pulse before initiating CPR. 46,120 (Class I-2)…”

Section: Ii-3 Inform Trainees About What To Expect During Resuscitatimentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding and improving low bystander CPR rates: a systematic review of the literature

Vaillancourt

Stiell

Wells

2008

CJEM

139

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a crucial yet weak link in the chain of survival for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. We sought to understand the determinants of bystander CPR and the factors associated with successful training. Methods: For this systematic review, we searched 11 electronic databases, 1 trial registry and 9 scientific websites. We performed hand searches and contacted 6 content experts. We reviewed without restriction all communications pertaining to who should learn CPR, what should be taught, when to repeat training, where to give CPR instructions and why people lack the motivation to learn and perform CPR. We used standardized forms to review papers for inclusion, quality and data extraction. We grouped publications by category and classified recommendations using a standardized classification system that was based on level of evidence. Results: We reviewed 2409 articles and selected 411 for complete evaluation. We included 252 of the 411 papers in this systematic review. Differences in their study design precluded a meta-analysis. We classified 22 recommendations; those with the highest scores were 1) 9-1-1 dispatchassisted CPR instructions, 2) teaching CPR to family members of cardiac patients, 3) Braslow's selftraining video, 4) maximizing time spent using manikins and 5) teaching the concepts of ambiguity and diffusion of responsibility. Recommendations not supported by evidence include mass training events, pulse taking prior to CPR by laymen and CPR using chest compressions alone. Conclusion:We evaluated and classified the potential impact of interventions that have been proposed to improve bystander CPR rates. Our results may help communities design interventions to improve their bystander CPR rates. RÉSUMÉ Objectifs : La réanimation cardio-respiratoire (RCR) est un maillon essentiel, quoique faible, de la chaîne de survie lors de la survenue d'un arrêt cardiaque hors de l'hôpital. Nous avons cherché à comprendre les déterminants du taux de passants pouvant administrer la RCR et les facteurs liés à une formation efficace. Méthodes : Dans le cadre de cette revue systématique, nous avons analysé 11 bases de données électroniques, un registre d'essais cliniques et neuf sites Web scientifiques. Nous avons réalisé des recherches manuelles et communiqué avec six experts du contenu. Nous avons examiné sans restriction toutes les communications portant sur les questions suivantes : qui devrait apprendre la RCR, ce qu'on devrait enseigner, QUAND la formation devrait être renouvelée, où les cours de

show abstract

“…Omission of the pulse checking procedure from the CPR algorithm should minimize time losses bound to that procedure which had been of dubious benefit due to its unreliability and time consumption, no matter had it been performed by healthcare professionals or by educated bystanders. (16,17) Our results are in favor of such changes. Whereas 83% of reeducated students were able to check for the pulse properly, which may seem an encouraging number, the fact that in a one year period, the number of non -reeducated students who were able to perform accurate puls check declined below a mere 50%, is disappointing.…”

Section: Reeducated (N= 30)mentioning

confidence: 49%

A brief reeducation in cardiopulmonary resuscitation after six months-the benefit from timely repetition

Frković¹,

Šustić²,

Zeidler³

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Skills of lay people in checking the carotid pulse

Cited by 171 publications

References 1 publication

Impact of bystander-performed ventilation on functional outcomes after cardiac arrest and factors associated with ventilation-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A large observational study

Impact of bystander-performed ventilation on functional outcomes after cardiac arrest and factors associated with ventilation-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A large observational study

Understanding and improving low bystander CPR rates: a systematic review of the literature

A brief reeducation in cardiopulmonary resuscitation after six months-the benefit from timely repetition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About