Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Concerns about mouth-to-mouth contact

C. J. Locke, R. A. Berg, Arthur B Sanders, Melinda F Davis, M. M. Milander, Karl B Kern, G. A. Ewy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

202 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is performed on only a small percentage of patients who suffer cardiac arrest. We conducted a study to elucidate attitudes toward and potential obstacles to performance of bystander CPR. Methods: Attitude survey of 975 people on the University Heart Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, mailing list. Participants were asked about their willingness to perform CPR under four conditions, with varying relationships (stranger vs relative or friend) and CPR techniques (chest compressions plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation [CC+V] vs chest compressions alone [CC]). Results: Participants rated willingness to perform CPR and concern about disease transmission. Both relationship and CPR technique affected willingness to respond. Only 15% would 'definitely' provide CC +V with strangers compared with 68% who would 'definitely' perform CC. Even with relatives or friends, only 74% would 'definitely' provide CC+V compared with 88% who would 'definitely' provide CC. Eighty-two percent of participants were at least 'moderately' concerned about disease transmission. Conclusion: Concerns regarding mouth-to-mouth ventilation appear to create substantial barriers to performance of bystander CPR. Intensified educational efforts and investigations of new approaches to bystander CPR are warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)938-943
Number of pages6
JournalArchives of Internal Medicine
Volume155
Issue number9
StatePublished - 1995

Fingerprint

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
Mouth
Thorax
Ventilation
Heart Arrest

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation : Concerns about mouth-to-mouth contact. / Locke, C. J.; Berg, R. A.; Sanders, Arthur B; Davis, Melinda F; Milander, M. M.; Kern, Karl B; Ewy, G. A.

In: Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 155, No. 9, 1995, p. 938-943.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9029125a51c44924aa3d2161daa4a4e9,
title = "Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Concerns about mouth-to-mouth contact",
abstract = "Background: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is performed on only a small percentage of patients who suffer cardiac arrest. We conducted a study to elucidate attitudes toward and potential obstacles to performance of bystander CPR. Methods: Attitude survey of 975 people on the University Heart Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, mailing list. Participants were asked about their willingness to perform CPR under four conditions, with varying relationships (stranger vs relative or friend) and CPR techniques (chest compressions plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation [CC+V] vs chest compressions alone [CC]). Results: Participants rated willingness to perform CPR and concern about disease transmission. Both relationship and CPR technique affected willingness to respond. Only 15{\%} would 'definitely' provide CC +V with strangers compared with 68{\%} who would 'definitely' perform CC. Even with relatives or friends, only 74{\%} would 'definitely' provide CC+V compared with 88{\%} who would 'definitely' provide CC. Eighty-two percent of participants were at least 'moderately' concerned about disease transmission. Conclusion: Concerns regarding mouth-to-mouth ventilation appear to create substantial barriers to performance of bystander CPR. Intensified educational efforts and investigations of new approaches to bystander CPR are warranted.",
author = "Locke, {C. J.} and Berg, {R. A.} and Sanders, {Arthur B} and Davis, {Melinda F} and Milander, {M. M.} and Kern, {Karl B} and Ewy, {G. A.}",
year = "1995",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "155",
pages = "938--943",
journal = "JAMA Internal Medicine",
issn = "2168-6106",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation

T2 - Concerns about mouth-to-mouth contact

AU - Locke, C. J.

AU - Berg, R. A.

AU - Sanders, Arthur B

AU - Davis, Melinda F

AU - Milander, M. M.

AU - Kern, Karl B

AU - Ewy, G. A.

PY - 1995

Y1 - 1995

N2 - Background: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is performed on only a small percentage of patients who suffer cardiac arrest. We conducted a study to elucidate attitudes toward and potential obstacles to performance of bystander CPR. Methods: Attitude survey of 975 people on the University Heart Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, mailing list. Participants were asked about their willingness to perform CPR under four conditions, with varying relationships (stranger vs relative or friend) and CPR techniques (chest compressions plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation [CC+V] vs chest compressions alone [CC]). Results: Participants rated willingness to perform CPR and concern about disease transmission. Both relationship and CPR technique affected willingness to respond. Only 15% would 'definitely' provide CC +V with strangers compared with 68% who would 'definitely' perform CC. Even with relatives or friends, only 74% would 'definitely' provide CC+V compared with 88% who would 'definitely' provide CC. Eighty-two percent of participants were at least 'moderately' concerned about disease transmission. Conclusion: Concerns regarding mouth-to-mouth ventilation appear to create substantial barriers to performance of bystander CPR. Intensified educational efforts and investigations of new approaches to bystander CPR are warranted.

AB - Background: Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is performed on only a small percentage of patients who suffer cardiac arrest. We conducted a study to elucidate attitudes toward and potential obstacles to performance of bystander CPR. Methods: Attitude survey of 975 people on the University Heart Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, mailing list. Participants were asked about their willingness to perform CPR under four conditions, with varying relationships (stranger vs relative or friend) and CPR techniques (chest compressions plus mouth-to-mouth ventilation [CC+V] vs chest compressions alone [CC]). Results: Participants rated willingness to perform CPR and concern about disease transmission. Both relationship and CPR technique affected willingness to respond. Only 15% would 'definitely' provide CC +V with strangers compared with 68% who would 'definitely' perform CC. Even with relatives or friends, only 74% would 'definitely' provide CC+V compared with 88% who would 'definitely' provide CC. Eighty-two percent of participants were at least 'moderately' concerned about disease transmission. Conclusion: Concerns regarding mouth-to-mouth ventilation appear to create substantial barriers to performance of bystander CPR. Intensified educational efforts and investigations of new approaches to bystander CPR are warranted.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028934063&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028934063&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 7726702

AN - SCOPUS:0028934063

VL - 155

SP - 938

EP - 943

JO - JAMA Internal Medicine

JF - JAMA Internal Medicine

SN - 2168-6106

IS - 9

ER -