Linked Life Data

15340728

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/15340728

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
10
pubmed:dateCreated
2004-10-25
pubmed:abstractText
A decade after the onset of a discussion whether ventilation could be omitted from bystander basic life support (BLS) algorithms, the state of the evidence is reevaluated. Initial animal studies and a prospective randomized patient trial had suggested that omission of ventilation during the first minutes of lay cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) did not impair patient outcomes. More recent studies demonstrate, however, that this may hold true only in very specific scenarios, and that the chest compression-only technique was never superior to standard BLS. Instead of calling basics of BLS training and practice into question, more and better training of lay persons and professionals appears mandatory, and targeted use of dispatcher-guided telephone CPR should be evaluated and, if it improves outcome, it should be encouraged. Future studies should focus much less on the omission but on the optimization of ventilation under the specific conditions of CPR.
pubmed:language
ger
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Oct
pubmed:issn
0003-2417
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
53
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
927-36
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2004
pubmed:articleTitle
["Topless" cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Fashion or science?].
pubmed:affiliation
Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie, Inselspital, Universität Bern, Bern, Schweiz. klaus.markstaller@insel.ch
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, English Abstract, Review