Survival is similar after standard treatment and chest compression only in out-of-hospital bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation

Circulation. 2007 Dec 18;116(25):2908-12. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.710194. Epub 2007 Dec 10.

Abstract

Background: We sought to compare the 1-month survival rates among patients after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who had been given bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in relation to whether they had received standard CPR with chest compression plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation or chest compression only.

Methods and results: All patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who received bystander CPR and who were reported to the Swedish Cardiac Arrest Register between 1990 and 2005 were included. Crew-witnessed cases were excluded. Among 11,275 patients, 73% (n=8209) received standard CPR, and 10% (n=1145) received chest compression only. There was no significant difference in 1-month survival between patients who received standard CPR (1-month survival=7.2%) and those who received chest compression only (1-month survival=6.7%).

Conclusions: Among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who received bystander CPR, there was no significant difference in 1-month survival between a standard CPR program with chest compression plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation and a simplified version of CPR with chest compression only.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation / methods*
  • Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation / mortality*
  • Emergency Medical Services / statistics & numerical data*
  • Female
  • Heart Arrest / mortality*
  • Heart Arrest / therapy*
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Registries
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Survival Analysis
  • Sweden / epidemiology
  • Time Factors