Beating your patient back to life

What is your stance on (and experience with) the precordial thump?

  • I haven't done it but would absolutely try it first before moving on to accepted ACLS protocol

    Votes: 4 50.0%
  • I wouldn't bother trying a precordial thump

    Votes: 1 12.5%
  • I have successfully used a precordial thump (I am awesome)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I have unsuccessfully used a precordial thump

    Votes: 1 12.5%
  • I have witnessed it performed successfully

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I have heard stories of successful precordial thumping from colleagues I trust

    Votes: 2 25.0%

  • Total voters
    8

wilderness911

paramedic student
Messages
59
Reaction score
26
Points
18
Let's talk precordial thumps! What did you think I was talking about, you deranged medics...

Some questions and some thoughts. Yes, I know it got bumped from ACLS, but my personal stance is that if I witness an arrest (confirm they are pulse less, someon, etc) I am sure as hell going to thump the patient before I get started on anything else. Why? Because it's not going to hurt them, think - I guess it could theoretically cause cardioversion to a worse arrhythmia, but is that likely? More importantly it might help them, especially if I am off duty and the chances of a defibrillator on hand before medics arrive on scene are slim (and no, I don't cruise the streets in my Ricky rescue cape looking for arrests to thump). Plus, it is, in my opinion, the coolest freakin procedure in emergency medicine. Never had the occasion to try one myself, though, as all my arrest patients have been down for a couple minutes prior to arrival on scene.

So, why has the precordial thump fallen out of favor? The other day I was in a rig for a lively debate between an EM resident who claimed that it was useless and a 27-year paramedic captain who claimed to have personally performed it successfully on a number of patients, and sometimes multiple times on the same patient which sounds reasonable given the likelyhood of returning to a bad rhythm after cardioversion in the field. I have talked to plenty of folks who claim it has worked for them or they have seen it done successfully, but without seeing a strip to confirm its obviously impossible to make any scientific conclusions from that. So time for an unscientific poll. It would be interesting to get an idea how many of us have would/wouldn't use it, have used it successfully/unsuccessfully, or have heard from trusted colleagues who reported using it successfully.

Lastly, as an aside, I was in the shower the other day mulling precordial thumping and I had a thought...I always wondered how to get away with it without bystanders assuming I am a violent or unskilled a-hole. And then it hit me...if I ever have the occasion to use it, I am going to yell "Stand clear - administering precordial thump" in my best George C looney from ER voice and then administer a mighty blow. If that fails, at least I will sound like I knew what I was doing. Good plan right?

- Wilderness911 out
 
Yes, I know it got bumped from ACLS,

You mean, it was... thumped... from ACLS.

I've heard a number of success stories from EMTs I know and have read about others. Have had a few witnessed arrests in the ED and I've never seen anyone do it, nor even ask about doing it.

Why was it removed from ACLS?
 
Is your name Ricky?

Don't mistake my desire to pull off a successful precordial thump (high) for my desire to do anything but hang with my dog when I am off duty (low).
 
Well, unlike other types of healing or "medicine", EMS and ACLS are based upon scientific, evidence based approaches to patient care. One of my bosses absolutely swears that hypnotism is a real and valid approach to making people stop smoking. I disagree, but he is one of the smartest people I know about anything else related to medicine. He's been a paramedic long enough to have treated like one of Egypt's first few Pharaohs, and he's a brilliant instructor that's been teaching almost as long.

I have another boss who's been a medic about 10 years longer than I have and has had a much larger variety of patient populations working in and out of hospitals in level one trauma systems. Brilliant guy...he also happens to be a licensed massage therapist. There are times when I swear someone has an injury or illness where he treats per protocol, but after the run he swears an alternative treatment might be more beneficial.

So...brilliant people that I respect who have alternative ideas to medicine, but not alternative approaches...why? Because they recognize that the system as a whole works better when we use evidence-based, scientific approaches to medicine.

In the short term it's always like:
"Amiodorone's awesome!"
"Nope, now Amiodorone sucks."
"Backboards are awesome!"
"Backboards are killing our patients."
"MAST pants are awesome."
"MAST pants suck."
"Wait, maybe MAST pants are awesome again!"

In the short term, it's hard to see the progress that is made by the evidence based approach, because it seems just as flighty as alternative methods, or methods that were once in favor but are now no longer in favor. So, it would seem like sometimes we're doing good and sometimes we're doing bad; and the same results occur with other techniques or practices, so why is our practice better than the other?

But, when weighed against the evidence that occurs on the scales of time, we look at how medicine (especially western) has changed over the last 2,000 years, 500 years, 100 years, 50 years...that is how we make progress.

Medicine is a practice. That practice is sometimes wrongfully viewed as our individual experience over time, rather than our collective experiences over time.

So...

We don't do pre-cordial thumps because the evidence suggests poor outcomes compared to current ACLS techniques. It may come back or stay away forever. Regardless, medicine in 50 years will be vastly superior to what we do now.
 
Because giving high concentration O2 to every patient and strapping them to a hard plastic board is scientifically proven to instantly cure any ailments.

...and most places don't do that anymore...because there is not evidence-based science for it.

Yes, we're the preschoolers of medicine, but we still attempt to use the same method of reasoning as the rest of western medicine, despite our immaturity and inexperience.
 
Dug up an abstract on PT

This study thumped over 100 patients. The PT group did not do as well as the ones who did not receive PT
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23994203
On top of that:
"Despite generating high LV pressures, precordial thumps were not effective in terminating VF. Based on the data, precordial thump for VF in cardiac arrest victims cannot be recommended but for asystolic victims might be beneficial."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19968931
 
Back
Top