Berg, Robert Allen

BACKGROUND: For sudden collapse from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in adults, bystander chest compression-only CPR (COCPR) results in equivalent or better survival compared with conventional CPR with rescue breathing. However, patients who arrest from a non-cardiac cause may also receive COCPR even though rescue breathing might benefit them. We sought to determine whether lay rescuers appropriately provided COCPR or conventional CPR depending on the suspected etiology of OHCA. METHODS: Analysis of a statewide, Utstein-style registry of adult OHCA during a large-scale campaign endorsing COCPR for adults who suddenly collapse. The relationship between bystander CPR (both COCPR and conventional CPR), presumed arrest etiology, and survival to hospital discharge were evaluated. Means and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. FINDINGS: A total of 7,652 adult OHCAs not witnessed by EMS were analyzed from 10/04 to 09/10. After exclusion of non-lay bystanders and arrests in medical facilities, presumed cardiac etiology and non-cardiac etiology OHCA totaled 4,913 and 1,202, respectively. The presumed specific non-cardiac etiologies were non-cardiopulmonary (e.g. overdose, suicide, subarachnoid hemorrhage) (57%), trauma (27%), and respiratory (16%). All-rhythm survival was 7.0% (CI: 6.3 - 7.8) for cardiac etiologies and 3.3% (CI: 2.3 - 4.3) for non-cardiac (p<0.001). Bystander CPR was provided for 33% (CI: 31.4 - 34.1) of victims with presumed cardiac causes versus 28% (CI: 25.6 - 30.7) for non-cardiac causes (p=0.002). Presumed respiratory causes of OHCA had a much lower proportion of COCPR (8.3%, CI: 4.4 - 12.2) than cardiac causes (18.0%, CI: 16.9 - 19.1, p<0.001). Survival for non-cardiac cases was: 4.4% (CI 0.9 - 7.8) for conventional CPR, 3.5% (CI: 0.9 - 6.0) for COCPR, and 3.1% (CI: 2.0 - 4.3) for no CPR (p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of a large-scale, statewide public health campaign endorsing lay rescuer COCPR for adults who suddenly collapse and are not breathing normally, bystanders were much less likely to perform COCPR on OHCA victims who might benefit from rescue breathing. Furthermore, when COCPR was performed on presumed non-cardiac cause arrest victims, there was no demonstrable negative impact on survival.

Background— The incidence and significance of gasping after cardiac arrest in humans are controversial. Methods and Results— Two approaches were used. The first was a retrospective analysis of consecutive confirmed out-of-hospital cardiac arrests from the Phoenix Fire Department Regional Dispatch Center text files to determine the presence of gasping soon after collapse. The second was a retrospective analysis of 1218 patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrests in Arizona documented by emergency medical system (EMS) first-care reports to determine the incidence of gasping after arrest in relation to the various EMS arrival times. The primary outcome measure was survival to hospital discharge. An analysis of the Phoenix Fire Department Regional Dispatch Center records of witnessed and unwitnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrests with attempted resuscitation found that 44 of 113 (39%) of all arrested patients had gasping. An analysis of 1218 EMS-attended, witnessed, out-of-hospital cardiac arrests demonstrated that the presence or absence of gasping correlated with EMS arrival time. Gasping was present in 39 of 119 patients (33%) who arrested after EMS arrival, in 73 of 363 (20%) when EMS arrival was <7 minutes, in 50 of 360 (14%) when EMS arrival time was 7 to 9 minutes, and in 25 of 338 (7%) when EMS arrival time was >9 minutes. Survival to hospital discharge occurred in 54 of 191 patients (28%) who gasped and in 80 of 1027 (8%) who did not (adjusted odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 2.2 to 5.2). Among the 481 patients who received bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, survival to hospital discharge occurred among 30 of 77 patients who gasped (39%) versus only 38 of 404 among those who did not gasp (9%) (adjusted odds ratio, 5.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.7 to 9.4). Conclusions— Gasping or abnormal breathing is common after cardiac arrest but decreases rapidly with time. Gasping is associated with increased survival. These results suggest that the recognition and importance of gasping should be taught to bystanders and emergency medical dispatchers so as not to dissuade them from initiating prompt resuscitation efforts when appropriate.