Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T22:08:08.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome on Bystander Willingness to Perform Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR)–Is Compression–Only Preferred to Standard CPR?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Kin-Kwan Lam ,
Fei-Lung Lau ,
Wai-Kwong Chan  and
Wing-Nam Wong
Kin-Kwan Lam*
Affiliation:
Senior Medical Officer, Accident and Emergency Department, United Christian Hospital, Hong Kong
Fei-Lung Lau
Affiliation:
Chief of Service and Consultant, Accident and Emergency Department, United Christian Hospital, HongKong
Wai-Kwong Chan
Affiliation:
Head of Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine and Geriatrics, United Christian Hospital, Hong Kong
Wing-Nam Wong
Affiliation:
Medical Officer, Accident and Emergency Department, United Christian Hospital, Hong Kong
*
Dr. Lam Kin-kwan Accident and Emergency DepartmentUnited Christian Hospital130 Hip Wo StreetKwun Tong, Kowloon, Hong Kong E-mail: kklam_uch@yahoo.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

The effect of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak on the willingness of laypersons to provide bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) using standard CPR (SCPR) or compression-only CPR (CCPR) was evaluated.The preferred type of SCPR in the post-SARS era was assessed.

Methods:

A descriptive study was conducted through telephone interviews. Persons who attended a CPR coursefrom January 2000 through February 2003 answered a structured questionnaire. The respondents' willingnessto perform SCPR or CCPR during a witnessed cardiac arrest of an average adult stranger or that of a family member in the pre-SARS and the post-SARS era was surveyed.

Results:

Data for 305 respondents were processed. For the scenario of cardiac arrest of an average stranger, more respondents would perform CCPR than SCPR in the pre-SARS era (83.6% vs. 61.3%, p <0.001) and in the post- SARS era (77.4% vs. 28.9%, p <0.001). In the scenario of the cardiac arrest of a family member, more would perform CCPR than SCPR in the pre-SARS era (92.8% vs. 87.2%, p <0.001) and in the post-SARS era (92.8% vs. 84.9%, p <0.001). After SARS, more respondents were unwilling to perform SCPR (p <0.001) and CCPR (p <0.001) on strangers. After SARS, more respondents were unwilling to perform SCPR on a family member (p = 0.039), but there was no difference in the preference to perform CCPR (p = 1.000).

Conclusions:

Concerns about SARS adversely affected the willingness of respondents to perform SCPR or CCPRon strangers and to perform SCPR on family members.Compression-only CPR was preferred to SCPR to resuscitate strangers experiencing cardiac arrest after the emergence of SARS.

Keywords

bystander CPRcardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR)chest compressioncompression-only CPRresuscitationsevere acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , August 2007 , pp. 325 - 329
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Eisenberg, MS, Bergner, L, Hallstrom, A: Cardiac resuscitation in the community. Importance of rapid provision and implications for program planning. JAMA 1979;241(18):1905–1907.Google Scholar
2.Cummins, RO, Eisenberg, MS: Prehospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Is it effective? JAMA 1985;253(16):2408–2412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Larsen, MP, Eisenberg, MS, Cummins, RO, Hallstrom, AP: Predicting survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A graphic model. Ann Emerg Med 1993;22(11):1652–1658.Google Scholar
4.Becker, LB, Ostrander, MP, Barrett, J, Kondos, GT: Outcome of CPR in a large metropolitan area–Where are the survivors? Ann Emerg Med 1991;20(4):355–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Ewy, GA: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Strengthening the links in the chain of survival. MdMed 2001;Suppl:8–11.Google Scholar
6.Locke, CJ, Berg, RA, Sanders, AB, et al. : Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Concerns about mouth-to-mouth contact. Arch Intern Med 1995;155(9):938–943.Google Scholar
7.Johnston, TC, Clark, MJ, Dingle, GA, FitzGerald, G: Factors influencing Queenslanders' willingness to perform bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 2003;56(1):67–75.Google Scholar
8.Ornato, JP, Hallagan, LF, McMahan, SB, et al. : Attitudes of BCLS instructors about mouth-to-mouth resuscitation during the AIDS epidemic. Ann Emerg Med 1990;19(2):151–156.Google Scholar
9.Mejicano, GC, Maki, DG: Infections acquired during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Estimating the risk and defining strategies for prevention. Ann Intern Med 1998;129(10):813–828. Review.Google Scholar
10.Christian, MD, Loufy, M, McDonald, LC, et al. : Possible SARS coronavirus transmission during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Emerg Infect Dis 2004;10(2):287–293.Google Scholar
11.Lee, N, Hui, D, Wu, A, et al. A major outbreak of severeacute respiratory syndrome in Hong Kong. N Engl J Med 2003;348:1986–1994.Google Scholar
12.Lam, KK, Lau, FL, Chan, WK, et al. : Doctor-based basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation course: An alternative to the conventional approach. Prehospital Disast Med 2002;17(4):209–212.Google Scholar
13.2005 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care: Science with treatment recommendations. Part 2: Adult basic life support. Resuscitation 2005;67(2–3):187–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Hallstrom, A, Cobb, L, Johnson, E, Copass, M: Cardiopulmonary resuscitation by chest compression alone or with mouth-to-mouth ventilation. N Engl J Med 2000;342(21):1546–1553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Jelinek, GA, Gennat, H, Celenza, T, et al. : Community attitudes towards performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation in Western Australia. Resuscitation 2001;51(3):239–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Becker, LB, Berg, RA, Pepe, PE, et al. A reappraisal of mouth-to-mouth ventilation during bystander-initiated cardiopulmonary resuscitation. A statement for healthcare professionals from the Ventilation Working Group of the Basic Life Support and Pediatric Life Support Subcommittees, American Heart Association. Resuscitation 1997;35(3):189–201.Google Scholar
17.Berg, RA, Kern, KB, Hilwig, RW, Ewy, GA: Assisted ventilation during “bystander” CPR in a swine acute myocardial infarction model does not improve outcome. Circulation 1997;96(12):4364–4371.Google Scholar
18.Lam, KK, Lau, FL, Chan, WK, et al. : Teaching patients' relatives and citizens to perform adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A two year report. Ann Emerg Med 2000;35:S48–S49.Google Scholar