# AHA, and ARC First Aid Courses. and CPR



## That_Guy (Aug 4, 2009)

How come AHA and ARC First Aid Courses, are supposedly "First Aid" but both courses so radically different from one another? 

Since EMT-B+ are typically in charge of teaching First Aid, and CPR, I figured you guys would be the best people to ask.

I noticed AHA (American Heart Association) First Aid is far less "hands on" and more "Call 911 and hope to God the pt doesn't croak" and ARC (American Red Cross) is all hands-on, and assess if 911 is needed (or 911 for precaution)

But yet, the CPR for AHA and ARC, are both 30:2. and both certify for AED.

Anyone have any input on why AHA and ARC are so dramatically different?

And I don't quite know what forum to put this in, because First Aid and CPR are well below the level of BLS.


----------



## Lifeguards For Life (Aug 4, 2009)

http://www.emtlife.com/showthread.php?t=5840

An old thread discussing the differences between AHA and ARC.  I believe AHA is more common professionally.


----------



## That_Guy (Aug 4, 2009)

Lifeguards For Life said:


> http://www.emtlife.com/showthread.php?t=5840
> 
> An old thread discussing the differences between AHA and ARC.  I believe AHA is more common professionally.



Thank you, it's appreciated.


----------



## Chimpie (Aug 4, 2009)

That_Guy said:


> Since EMT-B+ are typically in charge of teaching First Aid, and CPR, I figured you guys would be the best people to ask.



They are?


----------



## Shishkabob (Aug 4, 2009)

Chimpie said:


> They are?



I think he meant many EMT-B/I/P's teach it?


----------



## Chimpie (Aug 4, 2009)

Linuss said:


> I think he meant many EMT-B/I/P's teach it?



That's what I think he means as well.  I'm just confused at the statement.

I'm not an EMT and I've been teaching for 12 years.

I can list about 20 people who teach for the ARC that are not an EMT.


----------



## BossyCow (Aug 6, 2009)

Chimpie said:


> That's what I think he means as well.  I'm just confused at the statement.
> 
> I'm not an EMT and I've been teaching for 12 years.
> 
> I can list about 20 people who teach for the ARC that are not an EMT.



ARC classes in my area are generally taught by people who have never used the material they are teaching on a live person. Probaby partially why AHA is used more commonly to certify those who will actually need to use the skills.


----------



## That_Guy (Aug 7, 2009)

BossyCow said:


> ARC classes in my area are generally taught by people who have never used the material they are teaching on a live person. Probaby partially why AHA is used more commonly to certify those who will actually need to use the skills.



In my area, only EMT-B, I, and P are allowed to teach First Aid. and CPR. 

And Police Officers as well. But that's it. (for here anyways) 

AHA is a joke. (no offense) compared to ARC First Aid, AHA First Aid courses are the biggest joke of the century. (nothing hands on, vs ARC which every skill has to be practiced. It took me 3 hours per day, for 2 weeks to get my ARC First Aid Card, vs 1 hour to get AHA First Aid Card. Just watch a video, do a 15 question test, and get handed the card, vs ARC, when I had to practice each and every skill in front of an Intermediate, all the way down to stabilizing (splinting, bandaging, etc) bone protrusions etc. Essentially, everything that's actually in the First Aid level scope of practice.  (but always contact 911 so EMTs arrive while doing First Aid, if warranted) 

But my statement, in my town, only EMT B, I and P can teach First Aid. my FD does AHA too. But I go to another source to get my ARC. (ARC is also required for CERT, AHA is as well. for Volunteer SAR, you have to have CPR and First Aid from both AHA and ARC. at least in my county)

But why AHA is required most by professionals, is absolutely beyond me.


----------



## rescue99 (Aug 7, 2009)

But why AHA is required most by professionals, is absolutely beyond me.[/QUOTE]

AHA has a better advertising strategy?


----------



## Ridryder911 (Aug 7, 2009)

rescue99 said:


> But why AHA is required most by professionals, is absolutely beyond me.



AHA is recognized and has been recognized because even though you believe they are a joke, they are the ones that developed the standards all others teach. ARC & all other obtain their standards for CPR from AHA. AHA at one time did little laymen teaching and emphasis. They are still considered the authority on emergency cardiac care as they have the Emergency Cardiac Care Committee (ECC) that develops the research and methodology that the world uses for the standards of resuscitation. They also provide research into much more than CPR as for ACLS, coronary/cardiac care (surgical) etc. 

In professional terms, usually ARC and their association means nothing. Personally, I believe their institution and programs are worthless as does many other medical professionals. Very few medics I know of are associated or teach for them as most still teach with AHA as they are deemed the professional level. Most hospitals still require AHA level certification and you will find that it is their programs that will be taught NOT ARC. 


Although, I do not currently like the way AHA has watered down and placed emphasis upon
they still are considered the leader and authority. Majority of the EMS, I know of require AHA certification and will not recognize ARC for professional level. Including myself. 

Personally for laymen usage, I could care less who teaches as long as they will perform it and it is correctly. 

R/r 911


----------



## Shishkabob (Aug 7, 2009)

That_Guy, it may be the area you're in because in my area we had to do every single thing hands on as well.

Get better teachers.


----------



## rescue99 (Aug 7, 2009)

Ridryder911 said:


> AHA is recognized and has been recognized because even though you believe they are a joke, they are the ones that developed the standards all others teach. ARC & all other obtain their standards for CPR from AHA. AHA at one time did little laymen teaching and emphasis. They are still considered the authority on emergency cardiac care as they have the Emergency Cardiac Care Committee (ECC) that develops the research and methodology that the world uses for the standards of resuscitation. They also provide research into much more than CPR as for ACLS, coronary/cardiac care (surgical) etc.
> 
> In professional terms, usually ARC and their association means nothing. Personally, I believe their institution and programs are worthless as does many other medical professionals. Very few medics I know of are associated or teach for them as most still teach with AHA as they are deemed the professional level. Most hospitals still require AHA level certification and you will find that it is their programs that will be taught NOT ARC.
> 
> ...



Don't mean to be rude or argumentative but, the Joint Commission Standards Interpretation Group came out with this statement a few years ago;  

"The current standard of PC.02.01.11 EP 4 requires that evidence-based training programs is used to train staff to recognize the need for and use of resuscitation equipment and techniques. It does NOT limit organizations to only Red Cross or American Heart Association, although those are two of the better known programs. The specific requirement is that the program is Evidence Based." [/U]

AHA and ARC may be leaders but, neither set the standard. They follow it, just like every other approved organization.


----------



## BossyCow (Aug 9, 2009)

rescue99 said:


> Don't mean to be rude or argumentative but, the Joint Commission Standards Interpretation Group came out with this statement a few years ago;
> 
> "The current standard of PC.02.01.11 EP 4 requires that evidence-based training programs is used to train staff to recognize the need for and use of resuscitation equipment and techniques. It does NOT limit organizations to only Red Cross or American Heart Association, although those are two of the better known programs. The specific requirement is that the program is Evidence Based." [/U]
> 
> AHA and ARC may be leaders but, neither set the standard. They follow it, just like every other approved organization.



But those standards are based on research done by the AHA. Any area is going to have one organization that does a better job of teaching skills based on the criteria they impose on the teaching. I believe its regional. 

ARC used to be the best for first aid around here, but have recently gone to a DVD presentation that allows for no actual understanding or questioning of those being taught. They are in a numbers game to show how many people they can provide with cards with little or no emphasis on whether those certified will actually be able to perform the skills when needed. 

I currently teach FA with a certification from ASHI. I like them because they allow me to teach my own program as long as the key points are covered. When I got spanked by my local ARC chapter for 'not allowing the DVD to do the teaching' because I stopped the DVD to answer a student's question, I ended my contact with that organization. Again, nothing against ARC, just my local chapter. 

Our regional AHA is very inefficient and constantly changing their procedures... you teach the class but the cards will be issued from us, no.. wait.. you issue the cards but you have to send the tests into us first... no.. you issue your own cards upon completion of the class, you have to use our cards... no you can print your own.. you have to order cards from us, but only on a once a year basis, so be sure you order enough.... So most agencies around here have opted for teaching 'to the standard of' AHA but receive their instructor certs elsewhere.


----------



## rescue99 (Aug 9, 2009)

BossyCow said:


> But those standards are based on research done by the AHA. Any area is going to have one organization that does a better job of teaching skills based on the criteria they impose on the teaching. I believe its regional.
> 
> ARC used to be the best for first aid around here, but have recently gone to a DVD presentation that allows for no actual understanding or questioning of those being taught. They are in a numbers game to show how many people they can provide with cards with little or no emphasis on whether those certified will actually be able to perform the skills when needed.
> 
> ...



Research is research..CPR standards are eveidence based and while AHA plays a role, they are not "the" standard. I have a letter from the Joint Commission dated Feb. 2009 explaining it. Since you're ASHI, e-mail me and I'll send it to you if ya like. 

I have certs to use ESCI, AHA, ASHI materials but not ARC. I've heard your same complaints echoed quite a lot when it comes to AHA and once in a while, ARC too. The cost is sometimes not worth it, you're right but, I gives da people what they want 

ASHI is fine but, they sure do trust that instructors will always be honest and ethical in how they provide instruction! ASHI is having a very difficult time getting their programs accepted in the same way states accept AHA and ARC...probably because they don't really take active control in the way materials are taught or distributed but, they're working on it.


----------



## Ridryder911 (Aug 9, 2009)

rescue99 said:


> Research is research..CPR standards are eveidence based and while AHA plays a role, they are not "the" standard. I have a letter from the Joint Commission dated Feb. 2009 explaining it. Since you're ASHI, e-mail me and I'll send it to you if ya like.
> 
> I have certs to use ESCI, AHA, ASHI materials but not ARC. I've heard your same complaints echoed quite a lot when it comes to AHA and once in a while, ARC too. The cost is sometimes not worth it, you're right but, I gives da people what they want
> 
> ASHI is fine but, they sure do trust that instructors will always be honest and ethical in how they provide instruction! ASHI is having a very difficult time getting their programs accepted in the same way states accept AHA and ARC...probably because they don't really take active control in the way materials are taught or distributed but, they're working on it.



I really don't care what letter you have but the Emergency Cardiac Care Committee is what produces those standards all other utilize and if you read where that committee is sanctioned from you will be informed. As well, present anything other than an AHA and most hospitals will accept the card until you re-take an AHA course in most hospitals (like it or not). Yes they can and do (if you want to work for them). I guess you have never read when the new standards are designed who releases them? 

I like ASHI because of the least hassle to teach and following national standards. ARC is usually associated for common laymen as the organization is usually regarded as a joke in the regards of coronary care and resuscitation again it is for the common layman. AHA is and still is considered an authority among physicians such as surgeons, and cardiologists when discussing *real* treatment of cardiac care, definitely not ARC. ARC is a great thing for the common laymen, and personally who cares who teaches it as long as it is taught ?

R/r 911


----------



## rescue99 (Aug 9, 2009)

Ridryder911 said:


> I really don't care what letter you have but the Emergency Cardiac Care Committee is what produces those standards all other utilize and if you read where that committee is sanctioned from you will be informed. As well, present anything other than an AHA and most hospitals will accept the card until you re-take an AHA course in most hospitals (like it or not). Yes they can and do (if you want to work for them). I guess you have never read when the new standards are designed who releases them?
> 
> I like ASHI because of the least hassle to teach and following national standards. ARC is usually associated for common laymen as the organization is usually regarded as a joke in the regards of coronary care and resuscitation again it is for the common layman. AHA is and still is considered an authority among physicians such as surgeons, and cardiologists when discussing *real* treatment of cardiac care, definitely not ARC. ARC is a great thing for the common laymen, and personally who cares who teaches it as long as it is taught ?
> 
> R/r 911



Rid, you just like to argue to argue. Please, feel free to think as you please. It's a free country. I'm not one to stand in the way of a person having an opinion.


----------



## That_Guy (Aug 9, 2009)

BossyCow said:


> But those standards are based on research done by the AHA. Any area is going to have one organization that does a better job of teaching skills based on the criteria they impose on the teaching. I believe its regional.
> 
> ARC used to be the best for first aid around here, but have recently gone to a DVD presentation that allows for no actual understanding or questioning of those being taught. They are in a numbers game to show how many people they can provide with cards with little or no emphasis on whether those certified will actually be able to perform the skills when needed.
> 
> ...



The way I learned First Aid via ARC, you watched the vid, and practiced each thing they covered. then, we got into more "advanced" things then what they did in the movies.

the AHA, every AHA First Aid course I've gone through, you watch a video, and take a 15 question test, and you're done. You get your card.


----------



## Ridryder911 (Aug 10, 2009)

rescue99 said:


> Rid, you just like to argue to argue. Please, feel free to think as you please. It's a free country. I'm not one to stand in the way of a person having an opinion.



Not an argument, just facts. Be smart and do some investigation on whom and how the standards are developed. I guess, you never read the JAMA section when the changes are announced and who produces those changes? It was just a few years ago the NREMT would allow ARC or other CPR cards. In fact not that long ago, ARC started the professional rescuer program, until then it was all common laymen style.

Then when the changes are distributed see when and how such changes occur. 

Like I said, personally I don't care who teaches, but let's be factual if we are going to discuss it. 

R/r 911


----------



## BossyCow (Aug 10, 2009)

I undestand that layperson CPR is not rocket science and monkeys can probably learn the skill. But, the value of a seasoned instructor is in the ability to instill the confidence in the student to trust themselves to do it when the need arises. Sort of like the difference between calling the east indian customer support line for your computer issues and sitting down with the teenaged compu-geek who lives down the road. But then, silly me, I prefer to understand what I'm doing instead of mindlessly performing a task.


----------

