FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2006287122> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2006287122 endingPage "1493" @default.
• W2006287122 startingPage "1493" @default.
• W2006287122 abstract "FOR MORE THAN A DECADE, CARDIOPULMONARY RESUScitation (CPR) using only chest compressions, forgoing ventilations by rescue breathing, has been described as an option in the out-of-hospital management of sudden cardiac arrest when bystanders are unwilling or unable to provide standard CPR that combines chest compressions with rescue breathing. The “Guidelines 2005” CPR standards promulgated by the American Heart Association (AHA) and the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) indicate that “the best method of CPR is compressions coordinated with ventilations.” However, the guidelines also note that laypersons who are unable or unwilling to provide rescue breaths should be encouraged to provide compressiononly CPR to individuals experiencing out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. This recommendation followed a 1997 AHA science statement that was the first document to propose compression-only CPR as a reasonable alternative to standard CPR by bystanders. Several fairly compelling theoretical arguments support the concept of compression-only CPR. First, it seems likely that compression-only CPR is easier to teach and remember than standard CPR, particularly for those who do not work in health care professions. Second, it has been postulated that bystanders may prefer to avoid mouth-to-mouth contact with persons who sustain cardiac arrest, particularly when those persons are strangers. However, in a study of actual bystanders of out-ofhospital cardiac arrest, very few (1.1%) mentioned reluctance to perform rescue breathing, and none reported fear of contracting infection. Third, and perhaps most compelling, an increasing body of evidence suggests that interruptions in chest compressions, even for such seemingly important interventions as providing artificial ventilation, are detrimental. Forward flow of blood ceases very soon after chest compressions are halted, and several compressions are needed to reestablish perfusion when compressions are resumed. The “push hard, push fast, don’t stop” mantra of current CPR teaching is designed to reinforce the need for minimal interruptions in chest compressions to maintain some degree of perfusion to the vital organs until more definitive therapy (such as defibrillation) can be delivered. Despite these theoretical advantages, most animal studies and human trials comparing standard CPR and compression-only CPR have reported similar outcomes for the 2 techniques; data showing a convincing survival advantage to the compression-only technique are lacking. Additionally, most of the existing human data are from observational studies, with few experimental trials in the published literature. Randomization is one of several significant barriers to performing these trials, particularly when examining CPR provided by bystanders who witness the collapse and provide immediate intervention while emergency medical services (EMS) personnel are summoned. Although it is possible to randomize the type of CPR provided by EMS personnel responding to an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, or by a team responding to an in-hospital cardiac arrest, it is nearly impossible to randomize the type of CPR provided by a bystander at the scene of an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. One elegant solution to this problem was used in a 2000 study by Hallstrom et al and in 2 recently published studies. Randomization was performed by 9-1-1 dispatchers for callers who were willing to perform CPR but did not know how to do so. In each study, the survival rate for patients who experienced out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and received dispatcher-assisted standard CPR was similar to that for those with cardiac arrest who received dispatcherassisted compression-only CPR, despite data showing that chest compressions are delivered sooner when the dispatcher omits the ventilation instructions, providing another theoretical benefit to compression-only CPR. However, in these 3 studies, no CPR was delivered from the time the patient collapsed until the time the caller recognized the emergency, reached 9-1-1, completed the questions in the dispatcher’s algorithm, was randomized by the dispatcher, and received CPR instructions. This no-perfusion time, typically longer than 2 minutes, may have contributed to the findings." @default.
• W2006287122 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2006287122 creator A5006777365 @default.
• W2006287122 date "2010-10-06" @default.
• W2006287122 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2006287122 title "Compression-Only CPR" @default.
• W2006287122 cites W1973460792 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W1992942826 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2034428355 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2035659312 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2038186471 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2047811193 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2049329813 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2056383710 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2057413381 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2069401380 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2078076280 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2093206366 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2100420108 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2102773848 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2106659642 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2131664527 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2135255941 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2184969446 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2330754709 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2610640624 @default.
• W2006287122 cites W2083441104 @default.
• W2006287122 doi "https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.1420" @default.
• W2006287122 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20924019" @default.
• W2006287122 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W2006287122 type Work @default.
• W2006287122 sameAs 2006287122 @default.
• W2006287122 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W2006287122 countsByYear W20062871222014 @default.
• W2006287122 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2006287122 hasAuthorship W2006287122A5006777365 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConcept C159985019 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConcept C180016635 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConcept C194828623 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConcept C2777055891 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConcept C2778165595 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConceptScore W2006287122C159985019 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConceptScore W2006287122C180016635 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConceptScore W2006287122C192562407 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConceptScore W2006287122C194828623 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConceptScore W2006287122C2777055891 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConceptScore W2006287122C2778165595 @default.
• W2006287122 hasConceptScore W2006287122C71924100 @default.
• W2006287122 hasIssue "13" @default.
• W2006287122 hasLocation W20062871221 @default.
• W2006287122 hasLocation W20062871222 @default.
• W2006287122 hasOpenAccess W2006287122 @default.
• W2006287122 hasPrimaryLocation W20062871221 @default.
• W2006287122 hasRelatedWork W2014565085 @default.
• W2006287122 hasRelatedWork W2333667173 @default.
• W2006287122 hasRelatedWork W2346058220 @default.
• W2006287122 hasRelatedWork W2811379513 @default.
• W2006287122 hasRelatedWork W2915633305 @default.
• W2006287122 hasRelatedWork W2935276369 @default.
• W2006287122 hasRelatedWork W3007791315 @default.
• W2006287122 hasRelatedWork W3152332061 @default.
• W2006287122 hasRelatedWork W4378375736 @default.
• W2006287122 hasRelatedWork W2752792551 @default.
• W2006287122 hasVolume "304" @default.
• W2006287122 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2006287122 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2006287122 magId "2006287122" @default.
• W2006287122 workType "article" @default.