BACKGROUND: Only 30% of survivors from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest receive basic life support (BLS) before the arrival of emergency personnel. This is also due to reluctance to perform BLS, especially mouth-to-mouth ventilation without barrier devices in victims who are unknown to the rescuer (either layperson or healthcare provider). METHODS: To evaluate the incidence of reluctance to perform mouth-to-mouth ventilation without barrier devices and its consequences in a simulated BLS scenario proposed by a questionnaire to healthcare providers of critical area in a public general hospital. RESULTS: Answers were collected from 128 of 165 (77.5%) interviewed healthcare providers. Physicians were 46 of 128 (35.9%), professional nurses were 78 of 128 (60.9%) and 4 of 128 (3.2%) were other health workers devoted to patient assistance. Seventy-five of 128 (58.6 %) were reluctant to perform mouth-to-mouth ventilation without barrier devices; 68 of 75 (90.6%) would perform BLS only by chest compression. Compared with non-reluctant providers, they would have been available to perform assisted ventilation by non-validated alternative methods (54.2 vs 18.8% respectively, p < 0.001). Seven of 75 (9.6%, no physician among them) would perform no BLS at all. The most significant predictors of reluctance were age < 40 years (p = 0.07) and previous attendance of BLS-BLSD courses (p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Reluctance to perform mouth-to-mouth ventilation without barrier devices is frequent and may reduce the number of potential BLS providers. Because of the concern about disease transmission between victim and rescuer, rescuers with a duty to respond such as healthcare providers should follow precautions including the use of barrier device also outside their workplace. When barrier devices are unavailable first responders should consider chest compression alone instead of not performing any BLS maneuvers. BLS training should help give a greater emphasis on this topics.
BACKGROUND: Only 30% of survivors from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest receive basic life support (BLS) before the arrival of emergency personnel. This is also due to reluctance to perform BLS, especially mouth-to-mouth ventilation without barrier devices in victims who are unknown to the rescuer (either layperson or healthcare provider). METHODS: To evaluate the incidence of reluctance to perform mouth-to-mouth ventilation without barrier devices and its consequences in a simulated BLS scenario proposed by a questionnaire to healthcare providers of critical area in a public general hospital. RESULTS: Answers were collected from 128 of 165 (77.5%) interviewed healthcare providers. Physicians were 46 of 128 (35.9%), professional nurses were 78 of 128 (60.9%) and 4 of 128 (3.2%) were other health workers devoted to patient assistance. Seventy-five of 128 (58.6 %) were reluctant to perform mouth-to-mouth ventilation without barrier devices; 68 of 75 (90.6%) would perform BLS only by chest compression. Compared with non-reluctant providers, they would have been available to perform assisted ventilation by non-validated alternative methods (54.2 vs 18.8% respectively, p < 0.001). Seven of 75 (9.6%, no physician among them) would perform no BLS at all. The most significant predictors of reluctance were age < 40 years (p = 0.07) and previous attendance of BLS-BLSD courses (p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Reluctance to perform mouth-to-mouth ventilation without barrier devices is frequent and may reduce the number of potential BLS providers. Because of the concern about disease transmission between victim and rescuer, rescuers with a duty to respond such as healthcare providers should follow precautions including the use of barrier device also outside their workplace. When barrier devices are unavailable first responders should consider chest compression alone instead of not performing any BLS maneuvers. BLS training should help give a greater emphasis on this topics.
Authors: Irena Krajina; Slavica Kvolik; Robert Steiner; Kristina Kovacevic; Ivan Lovric Journal: Iran Red Crescent Med J Date: 2015-03-20 Impact factor: 0.611
Authors: Mostafa A Abolfotouh; Manal A Alnasser; Alamin N Berhanu; Deema A Al-Turaif; Abdulrhman I Alfayez Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2017-09-22 Impact factor: 2.655