CPR: Is Modern Medicine Crazy

[ginkgo]

Decades ago they taught in CPR that you have to put something in someone's mouth so they do not swallow their tongue. Now CPR teaches that it is nonsense and people do not swallow their tongue. Putting your hand in the mouth of someone having seizures is a good way to get it bit off.

Then an article said that most of the time CPR does no good and you are likely to causes damage. That is fine. Even if it saves 1 out of 4 people, it is OK. But this morning on the doctors TV show with all these doctors they were saying, do you want to press your lips against a stranger's lips?

They said that a study showed that there was no difference in outcome between people who just got chest depressions and people who got chest depressions with mouth to mouth which is how you are taught to do it. So they are saying to not hesitate and do chest depressions until help arrives. Although if it is a gorgeous looking woman, I will ignore this advice and also do the mouth to mouth just to be on the safe side.

[ssandra]

I always thought that the mouth to mouth was when someone stopped breathing but still had a heartbeat.

and when they neither had a hearth beat and were not breathing then you do the chest compressions and the mouth to mouth.

The mouth to mouth (I was told) is needed to get air into the lungs so that the brain does not get deprived from oxygen...?


Any doctor online here who would like to comment?

[ginkgo]

Yes! Everything that you said was entirely 100% correct. Actually many MDs do not know CPR since it is for the time before the doctor or medical help gets there.

Obviously they are not tallking about someone who is sitting there with no problem at all. They were apparently only talking about the people who needed both since they had neither pulse nor breathing. This is the latest news as of this morning by a group of doctors on TV.

They cannot see if heart is beating since they do not have a stethoscope so they look for pulse.

[IceWolf]

The official recommendation in the UK was changed a few years ago. Now it says to check for breathing only, and not check for a pulse. Any casualty who is not breathing gets rescue breaths and chest compressions. Previously, people were taking too long to check the pulse, so the casualty was dying while they were doing it. And unnecessary chest compressions are not as harmful as was once thought.

As for chest compressions with no breaths: The UK book says that if you can't or won't give breaths for some reason, do the compressions anyway. And if the breaths are not working, only make two attempts before switching to another round of compressions. It is still helpful to circulate the oxygen that's already in the system. And if I remember correctly, the chest compressions also make some air move in and out of the lungs.

[JoePike]

A couple doctors/profs at the University of Arizona College of Medicine are backing their new Continuous Chest Compression CPR method (no breaths at all), and have some convincing arguments. Check out this video:

Learn Sarver Heart Center's Continuous Chest Compression CPR | College of Medicine

[Mounds]

As far as I know, CPR is very inefficient. It's only a means of keeping someone alive and I don't even think you can get a pulse back with CPR. Primitive life support.
I never had to do it myself but the idea is that you do it until the defibrillator is ready to go. The defib seems to be a fairly effective piece of equipment!

[Curtis2011]

Originally Posted by Mounds

As far as I know, CPR is very inefficient. It's only a means of keeping someone alive and I don't even think you can get a pulse back with CPR. Primitive life support.
I never had to do it myself but the idea is that you do it until the defibrillator is ready to go. The defib seems to be a fairly effective piece of equipment!

Yes..

My mother is a nurse and has to use CPR on patients in hospitals and nursing homes all the time. She says that it rarely saves anyone, whether it is her doing it or other nurses.


However, CPR can be very useful in situations like if someone was drowning and got water in their lungs. I believe it is more effective in that situation although I'm not sure..

[IceWolf]

CPR is used to keep the casualty alive until the ambulance arrives, and in that situation it does improve the chances of survival.

Originally Posted by Curtis2011

My mother is a nurse and has to use CPR on patients in hospitals and nursing homes all the time. She says that it rarely saves anyone, whether it is her doing it or other nurses.

I thought they did something different in hospitals?

[Futhark]

Originally Posted by Mounds

As far as I know, CPR is very inefficient. It's only a means of keeping someone alive and I don't even think you can get a pulse back with CPR. Primitive life support.
I never had to do it myself but the idea is that you do it until the defibrillator is ready to go. The defib seems to be a fairly effective piece of equipment!

CPR is not "inefficient" per se, it is more likely that the reason for the person's cardiac arrest is so irreversible and tied into either serious trauma or major cardiac events based on genetics or diet or smoking / drinking. CPR is actually very efficient, well thought out, and defibrillators work even better.

The last guidelines I knew in the US, basically the idea if someone is not breathing and has no pulse, you give 2 "rescue breaths" and then begin doing cycles of CPR at 30 compressions, 2 breaths, 30 compressions, 2 breaths...etc...until a defibrillator analyzes the viability of shocking the heart back into an organized rhythm.

Hospitals and ambulances have many tools such as heart stimulating drugs and endotracheal tubes to give the person the most oxygen as possible, but the current guidelines say the most important thing is to start doing CPR fast...the faster it is started, the better the chance for survival.

[NexusOfCompletion]

From what I understand about CPR, it goes by the "Better than nothing" strategy. Obviously when the victim/patient arrives at the hospital the top cardiologist isn't like "Alright LETS DO SOME CPR" (although I don't know what else a doctor would use except a defib). CPR was devised to be used before the paramedics arrived to keep the blood flowing to the brain just a little bit longer. It is in these situations where you will take every second you can get.

[Lakshyayidhi Lakshmihi]

Originally Posted by Curtis2011

Yes..

My mother is a nurse and has to use CPR on patients in hospitals and nursing homes all the time. She says that it rarely saves anyone, whether it is her doing it or other nurses.

Well that is crazy, because my mom is a nurse practitioner, has been a nurse for 35+ years, and she has saved literally thousands of lives with CPR.

She did the precordial thump on my Dad when he had a heart attack at the dinner table once. Cracked his sternum and broke 2 of his ribs, but she damn straight got his heart going again.

She is a pretty amazing woman, though. She also teaches nursing classes.