Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Emerg Med. 2012 Jan;42(1):88-92. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2010.05.019. Epub 2010 Jul 15.

Rescuer fatigue in the elderly: standard vs. hands-only CPR.

Author information

1
Scott & White Memorial Hospital and the Texas A&M University System Health Science Center College of Medicine, Temple, Texas 76508, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Hands-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (HO-CPR) is recommended as an alternative to standard CPR (STD-CPR). Studies have shown a degradation of adequate compressions with HO-CPR after 2 min when performed by young, healthy medical students. Elderly rescuers' ability to maintain an adequate compression rate and depth until emergency medical services (EMS) arrives is unknown.

OBJECTIVES:

The specific aim of this study was to compare elderly rescuers' ability to maintain adequate compression rate and depth during HO-CPR and STD-CPR in a manikin model.

METHODS:

In this prospective, randomized crossover study, 17 elderly volunteers performed both HO-CPR and STD-CPR, separated by at least 2 days, on a manikin model for 9 min each. The primary endpoint was the number of adequate chest compressions (> 38 mm) delivered per minute. Secondary endpoints were total compressions, compression rate, and the number of breaks taken for rest.

RESULTS:

There was no difference in the number of adequate compressions between groups in the first minute; however, the STD-CPR group delivered significantly more adequate chest compressions in minutes 2-9 (p<0.05). The total number of compressions delivered was significantly greater in the HO-CPR than STD-CPR group when considering the entire resuscitation period. A significantly greater number of rescuers took breaks for rest during HO-CPR than STD-CPR.

CONCLUSIONS:

Although HO-CPR resulted in a greater number of overall compressions than STD-CPR, STD-CPR resulted in a greater number of adequate compressions in all but the first minute of resuscitation.

Comment in

PMID:
20634016
DOI:
10.1016/j.jemermed.2010.05.019
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center