Wake County EMS finds that longer CPR saves lives

[karaya]

My good friend, Jamie Davis, just posted this up on Facebook and I thought I'd share it here. Jamie responded, "Interesting", and I'm must parallel his thoughts. Interesting.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/08...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

 

[Rialaigh]

"The longer someone undergoes cardiac arrest, the less likely he or she is to survive. But if a person survives, he or she is just as likely to be “neurologically intact” regardless of the duration of CPR, the study found."


I find that quote to be particularly interesting. I would love to see a medical study or two to back that up if anyone has the time to dig. I honestly would have thought the longer they are down the less likely they are to be neuro intact regardless of survival

 

[karaya]

"I find that quote to be particularly interesting. I would love to see a medical study or two to back that up if anyone has the time to dig. I honestly would have thought the longer they are down the less likely they are to be neuro intact regardless of survival

That's what I found interesting!

 

[drl]

Interesting findings, thanks for the share. I also found these to be pretty notable:

For example, responders changed to continuous chest compressions – instead of interrupted or staggered compressions – and found they got better results.

By "continuous chest compressions," they mean CPR with an advanced airway in place, right?

In 2006, the county’s paramedics discovered that cooling patients assisted in survival rates and prevented brain damage.

Wonder what they used to cool the patients, and by how much. Surely not cold packs?

 

[SandpitMedic]

Cold saline IV/IO.

And yes, ice packs.

 

[socalmedic]

the study was presented to the NEMSP conference in January, why are we only now learning about this? how many lives could have been prolonged in the 6 months since then? business as usual for EMS, day late and a dollar short.

 

[DrParasite]

"The longer someone undergoes cardiac arrest, the less likely he or she is to survive. But if a person survives, he or she is just as likely to be “neurologically intact” regardless of the duration of CPR, the study found."

idk, makes sense.... the longer they are in cardiac arrest, they less likely they are to survive. translation, the longer they are down, the smaller the chances are of having a survival.

but if they DO survive (with If being the big word here) and CPR compressions were continuous, and they do regain a ROSC, they end up neurologically intact. I think it's still a big IF.

By "continuous chest compressions," they mean CPR with an advanced airway in place, right?

no.... BVM works withan OPA, at 6 to 8 a minute, guided by ETCO2, but don't interrupt compressions to drop an ET tube. their poicy is not to mess with an IV, and just go for an IO and a blind insertion aiway device.

the study was presented to the NEMSP conference in January, why are we only now learning about this? how many lives could have been prolonged in the 6 months since then? business as usual for EMS, day late and a dollar short.

That's not EMS.... that's medicine. all the experts need to evaluate it, policies and procedures need to have changes proposed, evaluated, medical directors and clinical staff need to give their two cents, and then maybe changes will be made.

It's very promising, and changes will happen. but don't think that changes will happen overnight. in fact, making changes too soon could be considered negligent, especially if the next study finds results that were different than the original study.

This is why more agencies need to fund research, and get more involved in the EMS research process.

 

[medicsb]

the study was presented to the NEMSP conference in January, why are we only now learning about this? how many lives could have been prolonged in the 6 months since then? business as usual for EMS, day late and a dollar short.

That's how it works in Medicine, not just EMS. Findings are presented at conferences prior to publication, if they get published at all. Many times, abstracts are presented but the full study never gets published for one reason or another. It's usually not until the whole study is published and can be fully scrutinized before one can even think of implementing change (or not) based on the findings. And if change is to come, it can be years before the standard of care changes.