Chest compressions the best CPR treatment method

Chest compressions rather than mouth-to-mouth resuscitation is the most effective way of initially treating a heart attack victim according to a Japanese study carried out on more than 4,000 heart arrest cases. The researchers found that the chances of surviving a heart attack outside a hospital double if a bystander performs chest-compressions but omits the mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, widely regarded as part of standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) procedure.

Writing in The Lancet, Dr. Ken Nagao of the Nihon University hospital in Tokyo said that not only was there no evidence for any benefit from the addition of mouth-to-mouth ventilation but that the chances of surviving with a “favourable neurological outcome” were twice as high when would-be rescuers concentrated on trying to revive the heart by rhythmic chest-compressions. The purpose of pushing air into a heart attack victim’s lungs is to oxygenate the blood, while massaging the chest aims to re-establish a regular heartbeat.

If results of the Japanese study are used to revise the standard guidelines for helping cardiac arrest victims before medical professionals arrive at the scene, it could have another positive effect: more people might be willing to try. Of the 4068 adults examined who had heart attacks witnessed by strangers, 439 received cardiac-only resuscitation and 712 were given conventional CPR. But 2917, more than 70%, were left to fend for themselves.

While the Japanese research provides solid evidence that chest-compression-only resuscitation improves heart attack survival rates, the authors of the study caution that the same does not apply to respiratory failure brought on by near drowning, drug overdose or choking. In these cases, they say, an alternation of two breaths and 30 chest compressions is still the appropriate method.