14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation 2010 - Improve the quality of care

      editorial
      Indian Journal of Anaesthesia
      Medknow Publications

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The cardiopulmonary resuscitation or CPR is an emergency medical procedure performed in a victim of cardiac or respiratory arrest and it consists of rapid chest compressions to maintain artificial blood circulation, along with artificial respiration. It is continued either till the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) or till the person is declared dead. The purpose of CPR is to maintain the circulation to brain and heart, thereby postpone the tissue death and brain damage, until cardiac activity is restarted by advanced cardiac life support (ACLS), commonly defibrillation. The American Heart Association (AHA) and International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) have laid down the CPR guidelines in 2005 which are modified every 5 years and the next modification is due in late 2010. It is described in The Bible, wherein similarity to CPR is mentioned in the pages of Books of King's (II 4:34), wherein Prophet Elisa warms the dead boy's body and "places his mouth over his…" Artificial respiration is also attempted by Silvester (The Silvester method) where arm is used to aid respiration. Holger Neilson technique (1911) is also a similar technique to aid respiration. Mouth-to-mouth (MTM) respiration was added on the assumption that it will oxygenate the blood and its combination with chest compression is more effective for CPR. AHA guidelines for CPR and Emergency Cardiovascular Care (ECC) say: "Laypersons should be encouraged to do compression-only CPR if they are unable or unwilling to provide rescue breaths although the best method of CPR is compressions coordinated with ventilations."[1] The statement contained a secondary conclusion that "...provision of chest compression without mouth-to-mouth ventilation is far better than not attempting resuscitation at all." Reasons cited prospectively for the reluctance to perform CPR included concerns about disease transmission related to performing MTM ventilation. It is emphasized that chain of survival depends on the following factors. Early CPR to minimize organ injury and buy time. Early defibrillation to restore circulation. Early advanced life support and post resuscitation care to restore quality of life by enhancing the recovery of neurological function. The ILCOR, a body of seven international resuscitation organizations (AHA, ERC, IAHF, HSFC, ANZCOR, RCSA, and RCA), published the 2005 CPR guidelines[2] with a goal of simplifying CPR for lay rescuers and healthcare providers alike and to maximize the potential for early resuscitation. The guidelines include a universal compression:ventilation ratio (30:2), instead of 15:2 (except in infants), removal of the emphasis on lay rescuers assessing for pulse or signs of circulation for an unresponsive adult victim, and taking the absence of breathing as the key indicator for starting CPR rather than an absent pulse, in an unresponsive victim, since it is observed that lay persons could detect pulse in only 40% of victims. Following a sudden cardiac arrest, three distinct physiologic phases in the body, especially in heart and brain, are described. Electrical phase: In the first 4–5 minutes, defibrillation has most dramatic effect and it is highly successful.[3] Haemodynamic phase: In the next 4–5 minutes due to circulatory failure, the fibrillating heart depletes all the myocardial high-energy phosphate bonds and later resuscitation of normal contractile activity becomes more difficult. Hence, early uninterrupted chest compressions will provide coronary and cerebral circulations and help in the attempts to defibrillate the heart and restore spontaneous circulation. Since the pressures generated by chest compressions are quite low compared to intact circulation, the interruptions are to be strongly discouraged. Metabolic: CPR is only likely to be effective if commenced within 6 minutes after the blood flow stops,[3] because permanent brain cell damage occurs when fresh blood infuses the cells after this, since the cells of the brain become dormant in as little as 4–6 minutes in an oxygen-deprived environment and the cells are unable to survive the reintroduction of oxygen in a traditional resuscitation. Hypothermia seems to protect the victim by slowing down metabolic and physiologic processes, greatly decreasing the tissues' need for oxygen. COMPRESSION ONLY (CARDIOCEREBRAL) RESUSCITATION The compression-only CPR, also known as cardiocerebral resuscitation (CCR) involves simply chest compressions without artificial respiration. The CCR method has claimed a 300% greater success rate over standard CPR with the exceptions of drowning or drug overdose. A Japanese study claimed strong evidence that compressing the chest, and not mouth-to-mouth (MTM) ventilation, is the key to helping a person recover from cardiac arrest.[4] Thus, on March 30, 2008, the AHA broke away from the ILCOR position and stated that compression-only CPR works as well as, and sometimes better than, traditional CPR. In a review, Ewy observed that application of CCR methods, both in rural as well as urban population, has more than 300% survival to hospital discharge.[5] But the application of CCR in children is rather ambiguous. A cohort study published observed that in children who are victims of arrest due to noncardiac causes, the conventional CPR produced better results, whereas for arrests of cardiac causes, both the conventional CPR and compression-only CPR (CCR) are equally effective.[6] But Nagao strongly recommends that compression-only CPR by a bystander is known to all, is recommended and taught because it is a preferable approach to basic life support (BLS) in adult victims.[4] But the European Resuscitation Council, after reviewing the then available published scientific evidence, considered thus: "the current evidence is insufficient to alter its guidelines for BLS at this moment." A new consensus on science will be published in 2010 and it is appropriate to await the outcome of this process before new changes in the guidelines are recommended.[7] It is not in the interest of the quality of CPR to introduce new changes while the current guidelines are just being implemented. The resulting confusion will be counterproductive. The need to simplify guidelines, potentially at the expense of quality, just to encourage lay rescuers to perform CPR should be considered as minimal. The European Resuscitation Council therefore continues to recommend the teaching and administration of high quality, minimally interrupted chest compressions at a rate of 100 per minute alternated with two MTM ventilations in a ratio of 30:2. For those laypersons who are unwilling or unable to give MTM ventilations, chest compression-only is much more acceptable than performing no CPR at all. DEFIBRILLATION The electric current of adequate magnitude passes across the myocardium from the electrode paddles placed over the apex and base of ventricles so that the fibrillating myocardium is depolarized thus enabling the intrinsic pacemaker of the victim's heart to generate a stable perfusing rhythm. It is shown that CPR increases the success rate of defibrillation by maintaining the coronary perfusion during the interim period after cardiac arrest though this benefit exists within a narrow window of effectiveness.[3] It is recommended to use a single shock of 150–200 J for biphasic current and 360 J for monophasic current, at the earliest possible time. Since there is a possible delay in establishment of palpable pulse, CPR must be continued soon after the shock to minimize the organ damage due to ischemia. Time factor (CPR statistics) Type of arrest ROSC (%) Survival (%) Witnessed in-hospital cardiac arrest 48 22 Unwitnessed in-hospital cardiac arrest 21 1 Bystander CCR 40 6 Bystander CPR 40 4 No bystander CPR (ambulance CPR) 15 2 Defibrillation within 3–5 minutes 74 30 The availability and successful deployment of automated external defibrillators (AED) can certainly improve the survival of arrest victims. Tha application of AED in communities was associated with nearly doubling of survival, and Weisfeldt and others highlighted the importance of strategically expanding the community-based AED program.[8] Certain devices use techniques such as pneumatics to drive a compressing pad on to the chest of the patient. One such device, known as the LUCAS, developed at the University Hospital of Lund, is powered by the compressed air cylinders or lines available in ambulances or in hospitals. After numerous clinical trials, it has shown a marked improvement in coronary perfusion pressure and return of spontaneous circulation.[9] Another system called the AutoPulse is electrically powered and uses a large band around the patient's chest which contracts in rhythm in order to deliver chest compressions. This is also backed by clinical studies showing increased successful return of spontaneous circulation.[10] The post resuscitation period is often marked by haemodynamic instability as well as laboratory abnormalities. This is also a period for which promising technological interventions such as controlled therapeutic hypothermia are being evaluated. The available experimental evidence suggests that therapeutic hypothermia is beneficial. After a systematic review, Arrich and others suggested that any conventional cooling method to induce mild therapeutic hypothermia in adult victims seems to improve the survival and neurological outcome after cardiac arrest.[11] Every organ system is at risk during this time, and patients may ultimately develop multiorgan dysfunction. Initial objectives of post resuscitation care are to optimize cardiopulmonary function and systemic perfusion especially perfusion to the brain; transport the victim of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest to the hospital emergency department (ED) and continue care in an appropriately equipped critical care unit; try to identify the precipitating causes of the arrest; institute measures to prevent recurrence; institute measures that may improve long-term, neurologically intact survival. AHA observes that despite four decades of promulgation, it is a serious problem that majority of the bystanders are either unwilling or unable to perform CPR, despite several studies confirming the effectiveness and survival of arrest victims[12] and a higher discharge rate following implementation of AHA guidelines.[13] When effectively trained, even the lay persons in the age group of 50–76 years were able to perform CPR with acceptable quality for more than 10 minutes. Hence, there should not be any age bar in teaching and training the laypersons in CPR skills.[14] The mission of AHA/ILCOR is focused strictly on evidence-based scientific consensus reached by the dedicated physicians, through a comprehensive and unbiased review process, so that new CPR guidelines are published in later 2010. The scientific presentation of any subject is constantly changing and the mission should be to translate new scientific observations into saving more lives. All age groups of persons can contribute their might to save more lives. The need of the hour is to improve the quality of care and involve and educate everyone interested to contribute to save more lives. Late 2010 will see a new era with new guidelines of CPR.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Survival after application of automatic external defibrillators before arrival of the emergency medical system: evaluation in the resuscitation outcomes consortium population of 21 million.

          The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of contemporary automatic external defibrillator (AED) use. In the PAD (Public Access Defibrillation) trial, survival was doubled by focused training of lay volunteers to use an AED in high-risk public settings. We performed a population-based cohort study of persons with nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest before emergency medical system (EMS) arrival at Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium (ROC) sites between December 2005 and May 2007. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the independent association between AED application and survival to hospital discharge. Of 13,769 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests, 4,403 (32.0%) received bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation but had no AED applied before EMS arrival, and 289 (2.1%) had an AED applied before EMS arrival. The AED was applied by health care workers (32%), lay volunteers (35%), police (26%), or unknown (7%). Overall survival to hospital discharge was 7%. Survival was 9% (382 of 4,403) with bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation but no AED, 24% (69 of 289) with AED application, and 38% (64 of 170) with AED shock delivered. In multivariable analyses adjusting for: 1) age and sex; 2) bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation performed; 3) location of arrest (public or private); 4) EMS response interval; 5) arrest witnessed; 6) initial shockable or not shockable rhythm; and 7) study site, AED application was associated with greater likelihood of survival (odds ratio: 1.75; 95% confidence interval: 1.23 to 2.50; p < 0.002). Extrapolating this greater survival from the ROC EMS population base (21 million) to the population of the U.S. and Canada (330 million), AED application by bystanders seems to save 474 lives/year. Application of an AED in communities is associated with nearly a doubling of survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. These results reinforce the importance of strategically expanding community-based AED programs. Copyright (c) 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Conventional and chest-compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders for children who have out-of-hospital cardiac arrests: a prospective, nationwide, population-based cohort study.

            The American Heart Association recommends cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by bystanders with chest compression only for adults who have cardiac arrests, but not for children. We assessed the effect of CPR (conventional with rescue breathing or chest compression only) by bystanders on outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrests in children. In a nationwide, prospective, population-based, observational study, we enrolled 5170 children aged 17 years and younger who had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest from Jan 1, 2005, to Dec 31, 2007. Data collected included age, cause, and presence and type of CPR by bystander. The primary endpoint was favourable neurological outcome 1 month after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, defined as Glasgow-Pittsburgh cerebral performance category 1 or 2. 3675 (71%) children had arrests of non-cardiac causes and 1495 (29%) cardiac causes. 1551 (30%) received conventional CPR and 888 (17%) compression-only CPR. Data for type of CPR by bystander were not available for 12 children. Children who were given CPR by a bystander had a significantly higher rate of favourable neurological outcome than did those not given CPR (4.5% [110/2439] vs 1.9% [53/2719]; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.59, 95% CI 1.81-3.71). In children aged 1-17 years who had arrests of non-cardiac causes, favourable neurological outcome was more common after bystander CPR than no CPR (5.1% [51/1004] vs 1.5% [20/1293]; OR 4.17, 2.37-7.32). However, conventional CPR produced more favourable neurological outcome than did compression-only CPR (7.2% [45/624] vs 1.6% [six of 380]; OR 5.54, 2.52-16.99). In children aged 1-17 years who had arrests of cardiac causes, favourable neurological outcome was more common after bystander CPR than no CPR (9.5% [42/440] vs 4.1% [14/339]; OR 2.21, 1.08-4.54), and did not differ between conventional and compression-only CPR (9.9% [28/282] vs 8.9% [14/158]; OR 1.20, 0.55-2.66). In infants (aged <1 year), outcomes were uniformly poor (1.7% [36/2082] with favourable neurological outcome). For children who have out-of-hospital cardiac arrests from non-cardiac causes, conventional CPR (with rescue breathing) by bystander is the preferable approach to resuscitation. For arrests of cardiac causes, either conventional or compression-only CPR is similarly effective. Fire and Disaster Management Agency and the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (Japan). Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Cardiopulmonary resuscitation by bystanders with chest compression only (SOS-KANTO): an observational study.

              (2007)
              Mouth-to-mouth ventilation is a barrier to bystanders doing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), but few clinical studies have investigated the efficacy of bystander resuscitation by chest compressions without mouth-to-mouth ventilation (cardiac-only resuscitation). We did a prospective, multicentre, observational study of patients who had out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. On arrival at the scene, paramedics assessed the technique of bystander resuscitation. The primary endpoint was favourable neurological outcome 30 days after cardiac arrest. 4068 adult patients who had out-of-hospital cardiac arrest witnessed by bystanders were included; 439 (11%) received cardiac-only resuscitation from bystanders, 712 (18%) conventional CPR, and 2917 (72%) received no bystander CPR. Any resuscitation attempt was associated with a higher proportion having favourable neurological outcomes than no resuscitation (5.0%vs 2.2%, p<0.0001). Cardiac-only resuscitation resulted in a higher proportion of patients with favourable neurological outcomes than conventional CPR in patients with apnoea (6.2%vs 3.1%; p=0.0195), with shockable rhythm (19.4%vs 11.2%, p=0.041), and with resuscitation that started within 4 min of arrest (10.1%vs 5.1%, p=0.0221). However, there was no evidence for any benefit from the addition of mouth-to-mouth ventilation in any subgroup. The adjusted odds ratio for a favourable neurological outcome after cardiac-only resuscitation was 2.2 (95% CI 1.2-4.2) in patients who received any resuscitation from bystanders. Cardiac-only resuscitation by bystanders is the preferable approach to resuscitation for adult patients with witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, especially those with apnoea, shockable rhythm, or short periods of untreated arrest.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Indian J Anaesth
                IJA
                Indian Journal of Anaesthesia
                Medknow Publications (India )
                0019-5049
                0976-2817
                Mar-Apr 2010
                : 54
                : 2
                : 91-94
                Affiliations
                Editor, Indian Journal of Anesthesia, No. 21, 2 nd Cross, Kirloskar Colony, Basaveshwar Nagar, 2 nd Stage, Bangalore – 560 079, India. E-mail: editor@ 123456ijaweb.org
                Article
                IJA-54-91
                10.4103/0019-5049.63634
                2900761
                20661344
                d03341e9-8f19-43b5-9300-0105003f125e
                © Indian Journal of Anaesthesia

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Categories
                Editorial

                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                Anesthesiology & Pain management

                Comments

                Comment on this article