This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Cardiovascular Interventions, Other  • Critical Care/ Intensive Care Medicine  • Adult Critical Care  • Cardiovascular Disease/ Myocardial Infarction  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Joan Stephenson, PhD

JAMA. 2007;297:1646.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Bystanders attempting to revive someone in cardiac arrest should skip the mouth-to-mouth ventilation component of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and focus on chest compressions, according to Japanese researchers (SOS-KANTO Study Group. Lancet. 2007;369:920-926).

The researchers examined outcomes—survival at 1 month with no mental impairment—for adults who had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, including 439 who received cardiac-only resuscitation and 712 who received conventional CPR. Mortality was high for all patients, but those who had only chest compressions fared twice as well as those receiving conventional CPR. Among patients with apnea, about 6.2% of the cardiac-only group vs 3.1% of the conventional CPR group reached the 1-month survival mark; among those who had resuscitation initiated within 4 minutes, 10.1% of the cardiac-only group vs 5.1% of the conventional CPR group had a favorable outcome.

Research indicates that chest compressions without mouth-to-mouth ventilation yield better outcomes for patients experiencing out-of-hospital . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?