This Article  • References  • 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  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Sam I. Lerman, MD
Southfield, Mich

JAMA. 1994;272(19):1477.

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

To the Editor.

—An Editorial¹ in JAMA discusses the premature termination by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of trials of compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), because of lack of informed consent.

The addition of a suction phase to conventional CPR is a trivial, innocuous detail that should not require consent. The developers of the Ambu² device must certainly have tried its suction on willing volunteers and shown that its worst effect might be minor ecchymoses.

In any case, the use of alternate pressure and suction for CPR is described in the August 5,1939, Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift by Dr Rudolph Eisenmenger, Facharzt für physikalische Therapie, Vienna, Austria.

His device, which he called a Biomotor, was a cuirass ventilator that applied alternate positive and negative air pressure to the torso, and was used extensively throughout Europe for mine rescue and other victims of asphyxia as well as polio. He urged . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Drummond Rennie, MD, Deputy Editor (West), and Margaret A. Winker, MD, Senior Editor.

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