shorthairedpunk Posted June 22, 2005 Share Posted June 22, 2005 Please justify your reasoning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icyhot Posted June 22, 2005 Share Posted June 22, 2005 No way would I follow that method! What is the point of pumping blood if there is no oxygen in it? You might as well put them on Carbon monoxide instead of O2 lol. Plus that method would quickly exhaust the resuscitator and he or she would be unable to continue after only giving a few rescue breaths. This method won't be done by me any day soon! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark3743 Posted June 22, 2005 Share Posted June 22, 2005 I still don't like that you don't do 5:1 if you don't intubate them! I understand that they (AHA/RED CROSS ) are trying to make CPR as simple as possible but 50:1 just seems a little hard to swallow. N.B. I have not read the JEMS article! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted June 22, 2005 Share Posted June 22, 2005 The more ventilation's you give= increased thoracic pressure= less blood flow. that's why they found that patients are more likely to survive if you don't hyperventilate them. on the other hand 50:1 seems very extreme. Aaron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocket Posted June 22, 2005 Share Posted June 22, 2005 The more ventilation's you give= increased thoracic pressure= less blood flow. that's why they found that patients are more likely to survive if you don't hyperventilate them. That's what I've heard as well. Plus the inherent reduction in risk of gastric distention/aspiration. I'll follow whatever protocol is proven* (*IOW currently touted as the best in the most recent and comprehensive studies..this is always subject to change and there are truly no absolutes) to yield the best outcomes with the highest consistencies. -Trevor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippyRN Posted June 22, 2005 Share Posted June 22, 2005 i'm with aaron and rocket on this zippy RN, ALS Provider , TNCC provider and first aid / Ambulance assessor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emsgirl Posted June 22, 2005 Share Posted June 22, 2005 That's what I've heard as well. Plus the inherent reduction in risk of gastric distention/aspiration. I'll follow whatever protocol is proven* (*IOW currently touted as the best in the most recent and comprehensive studies..this is always subject to change and there are truly no absolutes) to yield the best outcomes with the highest consistencies. -Trevor If you read the full article you would also know that the reasoning is that the cells needed to actually get the heart to start pumping on it's own (ATP) aren't being activated until about compression 15, and then quickly die off when compressions stop. You would also know that the RECOMENDATION is to switch compressionproviders every two minutes, because as it is we are losing our effectiveness as compressions anyway. The articlealso says the Ratio will be50:2,not one as was mentioned. Remember there are all Recomendations, It is still up to your dept to write teh protocal around it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocket Posted June 22, 2005 Share Posted June 22, 2005 If you read the full article you would also know that the reasoning is that the cells needed to actually get the heart to start pumping on it's own (ATP) aren't being activated until about compression 15, and then quickly die off when compressions stop. You would also know that the RECOMENDATION is to switch compressionproviders every two minutes, because as it is we are losing our effectiveness as compressions anyway. The articlealso says the Ratio will be50:2,not one as was mentioned. Remember there are all Recomendations, It is still up to your dept to write teh protocal around it. Well If I had read it then I'm sure I'd know all the things you told me I am supposed to know. But like I said, I'm speaking in regard to what I've heard. Not what I've read. Hence my saying "that's what I've heard", not "that's what I read" :wink: -Trevor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 22, 2005 Share Posted June 22, 2005 It's all about the CPP dude....it's all about CPP! 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emsgirl Posted June 22, 2005 Share Posted June 22, 2005 Well If I had read it then I'm sure I'd know all the things you told me I am supposed to know. But like I said, I'm speaking in regard to what I've heard. Not what I've read. Hence my saying "that's what I've heard", not "that's what I read" :wink: -Trevor That was in reference to SHP, I was just including yours because it was also mentioned in the article. And from what I have hears, It is in the new Recomendations that come out in like August or September, teh 50:2 ratio will be there. Don;t expect it on a test until sometime next spring though is what I heard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.