[HN Gopher] CPR's true survival rate is lower than many people t...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       CPR's true survival rate is lower than many people think
        
       Author : rntn
       Score  : 173 points
       Date   : 2023-05-29 19:09 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.npr.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.npr.org)
        
       | Gordonjcp wrote:
       | You can't make dead any deader.
       | 
       | It might work. You may as well give it a shot, if only to say
       | "well, at least I gave it a shot".
        
         | sccxy wrote:
         | Do your best to give their family $200k medical bill.
        
           | lljk_kennedy wrote:
           | Or not, if you're not American.
        
             | Vaslo wrote:
             | Or prioritize your funds to pay for your healthcare, like
             | most responsible Americans do.
        
               | JshWright wrote:
               | You can be a very responsible person and still not be
               | able to cover a sudden expense that is a significant
               | fraction (if not a multiple) of you annual income.
        
               | sccxy wrote:
               | Two-thirds of people who file for bankruptcy cite medical
               | issues as a key contributor to their financial downfall.
               | 
               | What most people do not realize, according to one
               | researcher, is that their health insurance may not be
               | enough to protect them.
               | 
               | https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/11/this-is-the-real-reason-
               | most...
        
               | Gordonjcp wrote:
               | Maybe don't live in a country with third-world
               | healthcare, then.
        
             | fsckboy wrote:
             | healthcare still costs regardless of who pays for it.
             | 
             | And the countries with the most comprehensive socialized
             | systems also pride themselves on their civic-mindedness,
             | think about others, not just yourself: shouldn't you, out
             | of civic duty, balance trying to save the public money at
             | the same time as you decide whether you save a life?
        
           | Gordonjcp wrote:
           | Why would they get a "medical bill"?
        
           | hnthrowaway8860 wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
       | dghlsakjg wrote:
       | Generally CPR is performed when there is no pulse or breathing as
       | a last ditch effort to keep a brain viable until a full medical
       | team can do their work.
       | 
       | In other words CPR is performed on people who show no signs of
       | life/are already dead.
       | 
       | The survival rate for the control group is 0, so it is kind of a
       | miracle that anyone survives.
        
         | brianwawok wrote:
         | It's not that simple. People who do not get CPR live. Others
         | who get CPR didn't need it. Control group of 0 is missing the
         | complexities of real life.
        
           | dreamcompiler wrote:
           | It is that simple. CPR -- if done properly -- is only done on
           | dead people. Dead people don't come back on their own. And if
           | CPR is done on somebody who "doesn't need it" then by
           | definition it was done wrong, because they weren't dead in
           | the first place.
        
             | akvadrako wrote:
             | It will be done wrong, so you have to take that into
             | account.
        
             | shkkmo wrote:
             | This is wrong, CPR almost never brings people back.
             | 
             | What CPR does is provide minimal bloodflow and oxygenation
             | until electricity can be used to get the heart beating
             | properly again. By doing this, you extend the window during
             | which an AED (or other defibrilator) can be used
             | successfully and hopefully reduce brain damage in the event
             | of that success.
             | 
             | Indeed, if you have an AED, delaying its use to provide CPR
             | is bad.
        
       | groestl wrote:
       | I was actually surprised to learn that survivors are in the upper
       | single digits. After all, when you start CPR, people are already
       | dead. Personally, I had to do CPR twice (as a paramedic), and
       | sadly neither of the patients survived.
        
         | Faaak wrote:
         | Maybe dumb question here, but does it at least help to salvage
         | the organs later on (if the donor was okay with it) ?
        
       | uberuberuber wrote:
       | Critical care medic here. Adult CPR at least has some evidence in
       | its favor on a population level, but only as a bridge to using
       | electricity. CPR alone is merely slowing deaths arrival.
       | 
       | There is NO evidence to support any of the commonly used advanced
       | cardiac life support drugs in terms of functioning brain leaving
       | the hospital. Epinephrine (for arrest, not shock or anaphylaxis),
       | atropine, lidocaine, amiodarone, procainamide, digitalis, etc.
       | Its electricity or bust.
       | 
       | Just one of many reviews on this:
       | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4129833/
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | Would it make sense for households with those at risk of heart
         | attack to invest in an AED?
        
           | rdmirza wrote:
           | Even better is installing an implantable cardiac
           | defibrillator (ICD) in those at high risk.
        
             | noughtme wrote:
             | > at high risk.
             | 
             | Before an event? I'm not sure what insurance would cover
             | this. I don't really want open heart surgery before I need
             | it.
        
               | Calavar wrote:
               | Plenty of insurance plans cover ICD implantation because
               | it is recommended by the American College of Cardiology
               | for specific situations:
               | 
               | 1. moderately to severely reduced systolic function of
               | the heart due to a heart attack that persists > 40 days
               | after the heart attack
               | 
               | 2. severely reduced systolic function of the heart of any
               | cause that does not improve after 3 to 6 months of
               | pharmacologic therapy
               | 
               | 3. personal history of sudden cardiac death with a
               | persistent risk factor
               | 
               | ICD implantation is not open heart surgery. It is a
               | relatively quick procedure that is done by a cardiologist
               | rather than a cardiothoracic surgeon.
        
               | plugin-baby wrote:
               | > personal history of sudden cardiac death with a
               | persistent risk factor
               | 
               | Personal history, or family history? Maybe this is a
               | technical term? As a non-medic I can't imagine there are
               | many people who have a history of sudden death AND a
               | persistent risk of it happening again.
        
               | Calavar wrote:
               | Personal history.
               | 
               | "Many" is relative. We are talking about a fraction of a
               | percent of the general population, but if you are looking
               | specifically at the population of people who have some
               | form of long standing heart disease, it's not terribly
               | rare. I don't work in cardiology specifically, and even
               | so I encounter one or two patients a year who have had an
               | ICD placed for reason #3.
               | 
               | Persistent risk factors include things like or overgrowth
               | of muscular heart tissue (which has dozens of causes, but
               | the most common is severe, long standing coronary artery
               | disease) or scarring of the heart after a heart attack.
               | 
               | Persistent risk factors are not rare at all. The thing is
               | that most people who fall into bucket 3 also fall into
               | buckets 1 or 2. So in an ideal world they would have
               | already seen a cardiologist and had an ICD placed before
               | they ever had an episode of SCD. And of course many of
               | those who do have SCD don't survive long enough to have
               | an ICD placed.
               | 
               | If you are interested in reading more, you can search for
               | "secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death" or
               | "secondary prophylaxis of sudden cardisc death." There
               | are some good review articles available online.
        
           | gerdesj wrote:
           | I would say yes. Some of the answers here are referring to
           | population stats and you are worrying about your particular
           | circumstances, which is different.
           | 
           | If someone you come across (family, stranger, whatever) keels
           | over you need to, without proper medical knowledge, diagnose
           | the issue and then administer appropriate treatment. Oh and
           | could you do it within a couple of minutes please.
           | 
           | CPR should be a last resort - it can be rather barbaric. A
           | defib has a way better chance of success and won't break your
           | ribs.
           | 
           | A defib costs around PS1000 or so. Hopefully that money is
           | wasted.
        
           | dreamcompiler wrote:
           | More important: Call 911 and start CPR. 911 will always bring
           | a defibrillator.
        
           | jdietrich wrote:
           | Generally not, for two reasons.
           | 
           | Firstly, the people most at risk of cardiac arrest are
           | unlikely to regain any meaningful quality of life after
           | resuscitation. An AED might bring a very elderly and/or very
           | ill person back from the dead, but more often than not
           | they'll be _just barely_ alive afterwards, which is not an
           | outcome that most people would choose for themselves. People
           | who are close to the end of their natural lives would benefit
           | much more from serious conversations about end-of-life care
           | than expensive gadgets and false hope.
           | 
           | Secondly, most of the risk of cardiac arrest in younger and
           | relatively healthier people is preventable. If you're not a
           | frail elderly person but you consider yourself at risk of
           | cardiac arrest, it's very likely that you're at least one of:
           | obese, sedentary, hypertensive, poorly-managed diabetic.
           | Before you go out and buy an AED, give some serious thought
           | to what kind of state you'd be in after surviving a cardiac
           | arrest and to whether you'd rather take meaningful action to
           | improve your health now.
           | 
           | Some people with cardiac abnormalities might be good
           | candidates for an at-home AED, but they'd generally be better
           | candidates for an ICD. A young and otherwise healthy person
           | with a condition like LQTS, Brugada or severe HCM is at very
           | real risk of sudden cardiac arrest, but the most likely
           | trigger for that arrest would be strenuous physical exercise
           | - something that most of us don't do in our own homes.
        
           | robbiep wrote:
           | The most common cause of sudden cardiac death is blocked left
           | anterior descending artery.
           | 
           | Generally this is unknown until it happens.
           | 
           | It kills 250,000 Americans every year.
           | 
           | It would make the most sense for people above 50 with a
           | family history of heart disease to have a CT coronary
           | angiogram or for those above 40 to have a Cardiac Calcium
           | Score to risk stratify for future CTCA.
           | 
           | Distributing AEDs is infrastructure heavy and indiscriminate
           | because you don't know who actually needs one.
        
             | tomatocracy wrote:
             | In the UK, in addition to what the sibling comment
             | mentioned about phone boxes, a lot of workplaces now have
             | AEDs on site (eg I know mine does) and they're also common
             | at large-scale events. I don't know if there are any
             | statistics on how much good they've done but that seems
             | like quite a sensible approach to me as you can presumably
             | get quite a lot of population coverage quite cheaply.
             | 
             | By contrast, a CT coronary angiogram I suspect is rather
             | more resource heavy - in particular I suspect having enough
             | qualified cardiologists to interpret the results (not just
             | having CT machines and staff to administer the test) might
             | be a bottleneck (anecdotal, but having had one myself due
             | to family history of heart disease, I had a longer wait for
             | results after the scan than to get the scan itself).
        
               | robbiep wrote:
               | It's risk stratification vs preventative care. You don't
               | WANT someone to have a heart attack and require the AED,
               | because you've only got a 5-20% chance of making it out
               | of hospital.
               | 
               | These things are not equivalant!!!
               | 
               | Risk stratification for AEDs at work and public events,
               | whereas screening should increasingly be part of the plan
               | particularly if you have a family history (defined as 1
               | or more relatives who died younger than 65 from a heart
               | attack)
               | 
               | CTCA doesn't require a cardiologist, just a radiologist,
               | but a cardiologist referral makes it free (in australia)
               | otherwise it's $500. Which is pretty good really
        
             | sacnoradhq wrote:
             | There's a cardiologist dark joke about this.
             | 
             | We should be sending ~10 million more patients to the cath
             | lab prophylactically to get a baseline.
        
             | moffkalast wrote:
             | Well as long as it only kills Americans, then the simple
             | solution is to emigrate /s
        
             | gerdesj wrote:
             | Quite a lot of people/families can find PS500-1000 for
             | something important. The more that can, the cheaper it will
             | become.
             | 
             | AEDs/Defibs are just an expensive battery powered thing,
             | that we just don't bother to discuss. With around an hour
             | or less training, you can expect to be at least 10x more
             | effective than the best CPR. CPR is horrible to deploy and
             | very complicated but I will if I have no choice.
        
               | robbiep wrote:
               | They're not equivalent though! An AED means your heart
               | muscle has been absolutely trashed and will never be the
               | same again. Plus, there's still the issue of who actually
               | needs an AED in their house, and if you know that,
               | they've probably got an IED.
               | 
               | Whereas if you can for the same cost have a scan after
               | being reviewed appropriately, you can avoid the heart
               | muscle trashing. That is nothing short of a miracle in
               | terms of the extension of lifespan available
        
           | stbede wrote:
           | They are about $500 on the cheap end if I'm not mistaken.
        
           | ericd wrote:
           | At $1k, it's not a no-brainer, but it's also not that
           | expensive in the context of the risk it counters.
        
         | w10-1 wrote:
         | "only as a bridge to using electricity"
         | 
         | The key point is that the AED (automatic electric
         | defibrillator) will tell you if you have a shockable rhythm.
         | 
         | Many modern AED's can be used by untrained people, so if you
         | see a cardiac arrest, find the nearest AED and deliver it
         | and/or follow its (brief) instructions. Once you know this,
         | you'll start tracking the last one you saw, and you'll find
         | them more ubiquitous than you realized (and start advocating
         | for one in your office).
         | 
         | (And if you are doing CPR, the breathing part is less important
         | than the chest compressions. Blood flow is more important than
         | oxygenation. But always/only follow current
         | guidelines/training.)
        
           | bsder wrote:
           | > (And if you are doing CPR, the breathing part is less
           | important than the chest compressions. Blood flow is more
           | important than oxygenation. But always/only follow current
           | guidelines/training.)
           | 
           | The problem is that this advice is situational.
           | 
           | If electrocution is what caused the cardiac arrest, it is
           | much better to give breaths than compressions. The heartbeat
           | system resets itself before the respiratory system. The
           | problem is then that the heart is back, uses up all its
           | energy reserves, but there is no oxygen to replenish and the
           | heart goes back into arrest.
        
             | 7a1c9427 wrote:
             | > If electrocution is what caused the cardiac arrest, it is
             | much better to give breaths than compressions. The
             | heartbeat system resets itself before the respiratory
             | system. The problem is then that the heart is back, uses up
             | all its energy reserves, but there is no oxygen to
             | replenish and the heart goes back into arrest.
             | 
             | Can you provide a reference or citation to this claim and
             | practice?
             | 
             | It is always much better to give "conventional CPR"
             | (breaths and chest compressions) if suitably trained.[1] If
             | not suitably trained you are more likely to a) perform CPR
             | and b) do it effectively if not providing mouth to mouth
             | breathing.[2][3] You can argue about the nuance of
             | particular patient groups where there is potentially a
             | statistically significant benefit of providing conventional
             | CPR over compression only.
             | 
             | Under no circumstances are there benefits to providing
             | rescue breaths without chest compressions (as your comment
             | seems to recommend).
             | 
             | [1]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21273279/ [2]:
             | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7726702/ [3]:
             | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17420082/
        
               | bsder wrote:
               | I think it was a while ago down a rabbit hole from the
               | "Kiss of Life" picture talking about respiratory arrest.
               | However, I can't find a substantiated source anymore so I
               | will absolutely defer to your sources.
        
           | elevaet wrote:
           | What's the fastest way to find the nearest AED?
        
             | kej wrote:
             | There's an app for that:
             | https://www.pulsepoint.org/download
        
             | 7a1c9427 wrote:
             | Depending on your country the GoodSAM app potentially has
             | good mapping/coverage of AED locations:
             | https://www.goodsamapp.org/aed
        
             | stbede wrote:
             | At least where I live, it's a requirement in order to
             | operate a business. If you go anywhere and ask for their
             | AED and they don't have one they can be shut down.
        
             | truculent wrote:
             | In the UK, many old phone boxes have been converted to
             | house defibrillators:
             | 
             | [0]: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/red-
             | phone-bo...
             | 
             | [1]: https://www.communityheartbeat.org.uk/convert-phone-
             | box
        
             | jdietrich wrote:
             | In most countries, by asking the emergency dispatcher when
             | you call for an ambulance. Start chest compressions, get
             | someone to call for an ambulance, _then_ worry about
             | finding an AED.
        
           | FireBeyond wrote:
           | > Many modern AED's can be used by untrained people, so if
           | you see a cardiac arrest, find the nearest AED and deliver it
           | and/or follow its (brief) instructions.
           | 
           | AEDs are specifically designed to be used by untrained
           | people.
           | 
           | Don't bother doing anything with ventilation unless it's a
           | pediatric patient who arrested specifically because of an
           | airway issue (foreign body, near-drowning). We (EMS) will
           | ventilate with high flow oxygen and intubate on our arrival,
           | but even for us, it still comes a distant second to
           | compressions and electricity.
           | 
           | With adults, blood can remain sufficiently oxygenated for
           | cellular respiration/metabolism for about 8 minutes of
           | compressions. Survival rates for adult CPR as a rough average
           | go down about 10% for every minute of compressions required.
        
           | brianwawok wrote:
           | As far as I can tell, many modern CPR classes dropped the
           | breath part. Just focus on the chest part.
        
             | thaumaturgy wrote:
             | Sort of. CPR classes are divided into, at least, "CPR" and
             | "BLS". Your basic CPR class may be a hands-only training,
             | but the BLS classes still include rescue breathing and AED
             | use, along with infant care.
        
               | grogenaut wrote:
               | Took a BLS course in the last year in the US (PNW)...
               | they barely covered breathing. I'm not actually sure,
               | from taking it, when I would do breathing. They did a lot
               | on the AED. I should re-watch the video.
        
               | lazyasciiart wrote:
               | I just did my cert in the PNW this month - there was
               | plenty of time spent on breathing, but also emphasis that
               | doing compressions is the important part. Interestingly,
               | the instructor thought this change was mostly due to
               | amateurs being far less comfortable with giving breaths
               | and being likely to refrain from CPR altogether if they
               | thought it was necessary to do the breathing.
               | 
               | FWIW I have done it by video during covid and in a live
               | class before and after, and I did find it much more
               | engaging and memorable in person. It was surprising to
               | realize that, but simply having the additional sense
               | memories seems to have made a big difference to retaining
               | the information.
        
               | thaumaturgy wrote:
               | Ah. I have a current AHA BLS cert. My understanding is,
               | do breathing if you think there is a clear airway, and
               | you have the appropriate PPE depending on the fluids
               | on/around the person's mouth, and either you are doing
               | compressions because there is no pulse _or_ there is a
               | pulse but the person is not breathing on their own. If
               | you do choose to do rescue breathing, it 's important to
               | watch for chest rise to ensure that you're not breathing
               | into their stomach, which is ineffective and will induce
               | vomiting if the person regains consciousness.
               | 
               | There is a decision tree there that some people may be
               | uncomfortable with in an emergency.
               | 
               | I welcome corrections from people with better training
               | than mine.
        
         | FireBeyond wrote:
         | Same here. And yup. Early effective compressions and early
         | access to defibrillation.
        
         | dreamcompiler wrote:
         | EMT here. I've had exactly one save in my career from CPR
         | without external defibrillation. That save happened only
         | because of epi, and the patient was disconnected the next day
         | because of brain death.
         | 
         | So yeah, CPR is great but if you don't also have an AED, it's
         | just theater.
         | 
         | Caveat: If you call 911 [in the USA] they will bring an AED! So
         | don't let the fact that you don't own an AED stop you from
         | starting CPR. Just be sure somebody calls 911 also.
        
           | Daub wrote:
           | Glad you said this. I have delivered cpr twice: once to my
           | lecturer at school, the other to a stranger in the street.
           | Both times they died. The experience of seeing people freak
           | out when they saw their loved one dying completely devastated
           | me out. Still now the memories are painful.
           | 
           | I told my father, who worked in medicine. He recommended that
           | unless there was a defibrillator nearby, I walk away next
           | time I see someone having a heart attack.
        
             | JshWright wrote:
             | Just to be clear, a "heart attack" commonly refers to a
             | myocardial infarction (part of the hear tis being deprived
             | of blood, generally due to an obstruction in a coronary
             | artery). Someone in the early stages of a heart attack will
             | generally (but not always) experience chest pain/etc,
             | anxiety, shortness of breath, etc.
             | 
             | A heart attack can lead to cardiac arrest, where the heart
             | stops beating effectively and the patient loses
             | consciousness. Cardiac arrest is the scenario you're
             | talking about (where CPR is indicated)
        
           | sacnoradhq wrote:
           | TLDR:
           | 
           | 1. AEDs should be everywhere.
           | 
           | 2. CPR isn't perfect but it works sometimes.
           | 
           | -----
           | 
           | 1. Get an AED if you can and keep it near your home and/or
           | vehicle.
           | 
           | 2. Just don't expect complete recovery miracle revivals like
           | the movies.
        
           | LorenPechtel wrote:
           | If it's just theater without an AED then why was it done
           | before the AED came about?
        
           | snowwrestler wrote:
           | > So yeah, CPR is great but if you don't also have an AED,
           | it's just theater.
           | 
           | There's at least one scenario where this is less true:
           | drowning. An otherwise healthy person, pulled promptly from
           | the water but not breathing, has a chance of being revived
           | with CPR.
           | 
           | There are a lot of drowning situations where an AED or EMT
           | are far away, and CPR should definitely be attempted.
        
       | dathinab wrote:
       | worse CPR doesn't do what people think it does
       | 
       | CPR is not a live saving measure, it's a temporary live extension
       | if it's not followed up with other measurements it's likely to
       | not save a live. And that's assuming it does work, and is done
       | correctly.
       | 
       | but anyway it gives people another chance at live they most
       | likely wouldn't have had otherwise
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | YetAnotherNick wrote:
       | > The traumatic nature of CPR may be why as many as half of
       | patients who survive wish they hadn't received it, even though
       | they lived.
       | 
       | It's the peak of coming up with data to make a story. The study
       | was only for old people with chronic disease, where lot of them
       | wouldn't want any life saving treatment let alone CPR. And even
       | in that group if >50% of said they were happy to have gotten CPR.
        
         | imglorp wrote:
         | A common expression is, if they need CPR, they're _dead_ at
         | that point and you can only improve their chances of reaching
         | definitive care, even if it's long odds. And yes there will
         | probably be side effects to complain about. If the patient
         | decided they didn't want that, ahead of time, they could have a
         | DNR in place.
        
       | hirundo wrote:
       | "The 2000 Federal Cardiac Arrest Survival Act grants those who
       | administer CPR or use an AED immunity from civil charges, except
       | in instances of willful misconduct or gross negligence."
       | 
       | That should make it less risky to try and help in the U.S. But
       | apparently it can still be a choice that's easy to get wrong.
       | That makes me less likely to jump in as a bystander, and to bias
       | intervention toward healthier looking victims who look like they
       | could tolerate the treatment.
       | 
       | https://www.cprcertified.com/blog/can-you-be-sued-for-perfor...
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | dghlsakjg wrote:
         | On the other hand: More payouts are made for people NOT
         | providing lifesaving care when they should.
         | 
         | https://newsroom.heart.org/news/legal-risk-of-not-performing...
        
       | querez wrote:
       | Not sure what the situation is in the US, but I've taken 3-4
       | first aid courses in my life (it's compulsory to get a driver's
       | license where I live). Every time, they told us that CPR survival
       | rates were abysmal if we aren't also using an AED. IIRC, with an
       | AED the survival rate goes up significantly -- though this
       | article states that in-hospital survival rates are only at 17%,
       | which indicates it's not all that great with AED, either.
        
       | willmadden wrote:
       | Yeah, sure NPR. I'll take the CPR thank you very much. Next.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Could you please review the site guidelines and stick to them?
         | Your comment here broke quite a few of them, including:
         | 
         | " _Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of
         | what someone says, not a weaker one that 's easier to
         | criticize._"
         | 
         | " _Please don 't post shallow dismissals, especially of other
         | people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something._"
         | 
         | " _Don 't be snarky. [...] Edit out swipes._"
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
           | willmadden wrote:
           | I didn't break the rules you cited. There is literally no
           | comment to which I could respond. The OP linked a terrible
           | article from a state sponsored news source.
           | 
           | If I'm dying, I'll take the CPR. It's better than the
           | alternative.
           | 
           | If you want a longer response, this article is state
           | sponsored propaganda that promotes non-resuscitation. I find
           | this article deeply offensive and disturbing, both morally
           | and spiritually. It's a great illustration of how the values
           | of western governments have diverged from those of their
           | people.
        
             | giraffe_lady wrote:
             | 100% agree. Thank you.
        
             | JshWright wrote:
             | > If I'm dying, I'll take the CPR. It's better than the
             | alternative.
             | 
             | No, it isn't... There are many outcomes of resuscitation
             | that are not at all better than simply passing peacefully
             | where you were. A lot of resuscitations end up with someone
             | in the hospital, in a coma, for a few days before finally
             | dying (with an expensive medical bill for their estate).
             | Even worse, folks can often end up with a severe brain
             | injury, but survive for many years with a very poor quality
             | of life.
             | 
             | It is totally fine that you would prefer CPR to be
             | performed at your current stage in life. That is the
             | default state, and what will happen if you experience a
             | sudden cardiac arrest. For many people, they would likely
             | make a different decision, given all the information. This
             | piece is intended to help give people some of that
             | information so that they can then have a more informed
             | conversation with their doctor about end of life care,
             | DNRs, etc.
             | 
             | I'm also curious why you're hung up on the "state
             | sponsored" bit. NPR does receive a very small amount of
             | federal funding (certainly much less than, e.g. Tesla or
             | SpaceX have received), but that funding does not impart any
             | editorial oversight (nor is there any mechanism for that
             | oversight to take place). This particular post is clearly
             | labelled as a "Perspective" (i.e. an opinion), written by
             | an emergency physician.
             | 
             | The notion of CPR in general (prolonging life at all costs)
             | is a very "western" approach to medicine, so if promoting
             | "the values of western governments" was the point of this
             | post, it did a very poor job of it.
        
       | JohnMakin wrote:
       | This isn't a secret. I was required to be CPR Certified for a
       | decade. Every class I ever took, the instructor made it clear
       | that it only makes a small difference in survival outcomes, in
       | order to teach students that "you shouldn't be scared to do it."
       | If done properly you should break ribs. They also teach this in
       | classes. I don't think anyone is under the illusion that CPR is a
       | hugely high-percentage life saving technique, except maybe the
       | public at large, but the public at large believes a lot of
       | stupid, untrue things.
        
         | strunz wrote:
         | This is covered in the article:
         | 
         | >In real life, people similarly believe that survival after CPR
         | is over 75%.
         | 
         | Also:
         | 
         | >I don't think anyone is under the illusion that CPR is a
         | hugely high-percentage life saving technique, except maybe the
         | public at large
         | 
         | You don't think anyone believes this, except almost everyone?
        
           | JohnMakin wrote:
           | It's unclear what exactly the article is trying to conclude,
           | but it seems to imply there's some agenda to keep doing this
           | technique despite evidence to the contrary - perhaps I should
           | clarify by saying "no medical professional is under the
           | illusion." They know the odds, and have for decades, and it
           | is still recommended training for people, and it should be.
        
       | themantalope wrote:
       | Weird way to say that people should talk to their doctors about
       | how they want to die before the time is upon them.
       | 
       | Major problem in the US. See it every day at my job.
        
       | piloto_ciego wrote:
       | The one time I administered CPR both victims of the accident I
       | stopped at died. In retrospect they were already goners (both
       | ejected from the car) and I didn't know what I was doing - hell
       | none of us really did, but we tried.
       | 
       | It was objectively one of the most traumatic experiences of my
       | life and I used to dream about those people's faces for a long
       | time - indeed I can still see them if I try. Regardless, we tried
       | and I wouldn't have it any other way. We tried.
       | 
       | I wrote a poem about it a few years ago:
       | 
       | Violence
       | 
       | Do you people know what it looks like when a man dies?
       | 
       | What you think his fucking soul flies?
       | 
       | As he serenely and comfortably lies,
       | 
       | And he flutters his contented eyes?
       | 
       | Not at all - there's blood and pain, And vomit in his mouth, and
       | foul brutal smells of bile and shit, and his eyes look crazy and
       | wild, as you pound on his chest to exhaustion, "Scoop out the
       | mouth - take those kids out of here, somebody fucking call 911!"
       | 
       | <ah ah ah ah stayin' alive stayin' alive> <ah ah ah ah stayin'
       | alive stayin' alive>
       | 
       | They don't tell you CPR never works, Or how the body jerks, Then
       | the EMT smirks, "I can't zap him again, but dudes dead."
       | 
       | So it was done, and I drove my truck to the truck stop to buy gas
       | and clean the blood from my hands and jacket and reconcile with
       | the two ghosts that had crawled into my head.
        
       | zackkatz wrote:
       | This article doesn't really address statistics for younger
       | people. I feel like the headline should be: should elderly people
       | be given CPR? For me the answer is a strong no. Why on Earth
       | would you give CPR to a 90-year old person!?
       | 
       | > survival after out-of-hospital CPR dropped from 6.7% for
       | patients in their 70s to just 2.4% for those over 90
        
       | DoreenMichele wrote:
       | The title was changed and not necessarily for the better. This is
       | a piece about the right to die with dignity, the right for
       | elderly people to say "Yeah, I'm ready to let go. Heroic measures
       | to keep me technically alive make no sense at this point."
       | 
       | In some cases, you aren't _prolonging their life._ You 're
       | dragging out their death and torturing them to do so.
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19598562
       | 
       | I am also reminded of the scene in Aliens 3 where the android
       | asks Ripley to simply shut him down because he's lost so much
       | functionality that keeping him "alive" has no appeal for him.
        
         | e40 wrote:
         | Yep, my mom (84) had an older friend years ago. Had a medical
         | directive that said "do not resuscitate" and her daughter
         | ignored it. She spent a year in hospice before she died totally
         | angry at her daughter for not following directions. Her quality
         | of life was terrible. My mom has talked about this many times
         | and sternly told me not even think about ignoring her
         | directive.
        
         | Arrath wrote:
         | I'll always remember my Great Uncle, who begged my Grandfather
         | every time he saw him, to bring him a pistol so he could end it
         | and escape the torture that was his chemo treatments.
         | 
         | There is absolutely a point past which all quality of life is
         | destroyed and it isn't worth continuing care.
        
           | bluefirebrand wrote:
           | It's really unfortunate that we're socially very willing to
           | let people suffer if that's the status quo, but helping
           | someone end their suffering is considered horrible and is in
           | many cases criminal.
           | 
           | Just look at the recent online discussions around the MAID
           | program in Canada. It's meant to be a compassionate end of
           | life for people who have lost all hope, and people are
           | twisting it to mean that Canada is just going to start
           | euthanizing people instead of providing healthcare.
        
             | DoreenMichele wrote:
             | Yeah.
             | 
             | Homelessness: "Personal issue." "Not our problem." "It's
             | you're fault for being junkies and crazies and has
             | _nothing_ to do with the general lack of affordable
             | housing. "
             | 
             | Incurable torturous medical stuff and want it over with:
             | "No mercy for you. Heroic measures every step of the way
             | until the bitter end."
             | 
             | It's sadistic.
        
         | jgeada wrote:
         | But there is so much money to be made on the heroic measures
         | front!
         | 
         | Estimates range from 12% to 25% of lifetime healthcare expenses
         | are accrued on the last year of life [eg
         | https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-
         | Systems/Res...]
         | 
         | For profit healthcare is an obscenity.
        
       | boringg wrote:
       | What's the point of this article? Are we trying to get rid of CPR
       | now so that people don't bother doing it because it has a low
       | success rate? It is literally a last desperate effort to save
       | someone in a really bad situation.
       | 
       | I don't think anyone is under the allusion that CPR has like a
       | 95% success rate do they?
        
         | MengerSponge wrote:
         | Doing CPR is scary and hard, and if it's okay to teach people
         | that while it probably won't work, it won't make things worse,
         | and if you're lucky it'll save a life.
         | 
         | Transparency is a small kindness to help the people who do CPR
         | not beat themselves up when it (probably) fails.
         | 
         | *illusion (sorry)
        
           | groestl wrote:
           | I think the risk that people don't even start if they worry
           | about survival rates is higher.
        
           | henry2023 wrote:
           | > it won't make things worse
           | 
           | Maybe you should read the article.
        
             | dghlsakjg wrote:
             | One of the preconditions for CPR treatment is that the
             | patient has no heartbeat. The patient is dead, or going to
             | be dead (depending on how you define dead) very shortly
             | without CPR.
             | 
             | So, while the side effects of CPR can be pretty bad, not
             | receiving CPR means guaranteed death.
             | 
             | That's what people mean when they say it won't make things
             | worse.
        
               | rjmorris wrote:
               | The article pointed to a study noting that about half of
               | patients who survived wished they hadn't. In other words,
               | they found survival to be a worse outcome than death.
        
               | dghlsakjg wrote:
               | What did the dead people report as their most desirable
               | outcome?
        
               | boringg wrote:
               | What a strange quote and data point. So 1/4 people didn't
               | want to survive, 1/2 didn't get a chance to choose and
               | 1/4 was happy to survive.
        
               | [deleted]
        
         | grogenaut wrote:
         | unless we're actively killing more people by doing cpr by
         | accident than would have lived it's a net positive even if it's
         | 1%.
         | 
         | If you had a 1% chance to save your kid by oddly palpitating
         | their chest... I'm betting you'd do it.
         | 
         | Tho as we all know you have to say "live damn you live" and cry
         | a bunch for it to work.
        
           | aeternum wrote:
           | Sure but what if you have a 2% chance of saving them by a
           | thump to the heart, or a 20% chance by running to the
           | store/business a couple blocks away and grabbing their AED.
        
             | grogenaut wrote:
             | During that time, a few blocks, they're likely been out for
             | now 2+ minutes or more.
             | 
             | Or you could you know, yell and get other people to call
             | 911 and find an AED.
        
         | oatmeal1 wrote:
         | I would recommend reading the article.
        
           | strunz wrote:
           | Seriously, it's crazy how many people on here clearly didn't
           | read it. I feel like I'm on Reddit. It says specifically:
           | 
           | >In real life, people similarly believe [1] that survival
           | after CPR is over 75%.
           | 
           | [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25711518/
        
         | matkoniecz wrote:
         | Make people aware that performing CPR on terminally ill people
         | is not self-evidently a good idea. See "A 'natural death' may
         | be preferable for many than enduring CPR" which is a title.
         | 
         | > She has written about performing chest compressions on a
         | frail, elderly patient and feeling his ribs crack like twigs.
         | She found herself wishing she were "holding his hand in his
         | last dying moments, instead of crushing his sternum." She told
         | me that she's had nightmares about it. She described noticing
         | his eyes, which were open, while she was performing CPR. Blood
         | spurted out of his endotracheal tube with each compression.
         | 
         | > "I felt like I was doing harm to him," she told me. "I felt
         | like he deserved a more dignified death."
        
           | boringg wrote:
           | Agree completely - in that instance the individual should
           | have some kind of DNR bracelet. That burden falls on the
           | communication of the individual to wear something indicating
           | DNR or requires an assessment at the time by the first
           | responder to decide it isn't worth trying to save the
           | individual and provide comfort instead.
           | 
           | I think that assessment by a first responder is a very
           | difficult decision to put on someone.
        
             | jdietrich wrote:
             | >Agree completely - in that instance the individual should
             | have some kind of DNR bracelet.
             | 
             | Even if you wear a DNR bracelet, there's a good chance that
             | it'll be ignored. Bystanders often don't know to look for
             | them and have no legal obligation to abide by them.
             | Healthcare professionals routinely err on the side of
             | caution if there is any doubt about the validity of a DNR
             | order, in no small part because wrongful prolongation of
             | life lawsuits are generally much less costly than wrongful
             | death lawsuits.
             | 
             | Advance healthcare planning is a much more complicated
             | business than simply wearing a bracelet. We need a broad
             | societal conversation about end-of-life care, not least
             | because DNRs are often misunderstood by both patients and
             | healthcare professionals.
        
               | boringg wrote:
               | I'm offering a simple first step to a complex situation.
               | I don't think the default option is let's not help older
               | people and resort to comfort.
        
               | Spivak wrote:
               | A fun new one I experienced recently when having a minor
               | surgery was having to sign paperwork saying I consented
               | to the doctor ignoring any DNRs, when I asked about it
               | they said it was because if something happened to me
               | while I was in their care it would make their numbers
               | look bad.
               | 
               | And oh man that's a no win if I've ever seen one.
        
         | yarg wrote:
         | Survival rates aside, CPR on the elderly can be particularly
         | brutal.
         | 
         | CPR is basically beating the crap out of someone in order to
         | drag them back from death.
         | 
         | You're talking about inflicting serious damage on people who
         | take damage more easily, struggle to recover and are
         | significantly more likely to suffer medical complications from
         | even minor injuries.
         | 
         | We like to place human life in an echelon of the sacred above
         | all other life - and sometimes this leads to us being kinder to
         | our pets than we are to ourselves.
         | 
         | A healthcare system that prioritises quality over quantity of
         | life could yield better results, but that's not going to happen
         | as long as things are controlled by a gluttonous hydra of an
         | industry that has a fiduciary duty to its stockholders, but no
         | real duty of care to the patients.
        
         | nordsieck wrote:
         | > I don't think anyone is under the allusion that CPR has like
         | a 95% success rate do they?
         | 
         | When I was first taught CPR in school, it was taught without
         | any reference to the survival statistics. The impression I got
         | was that it was very effective.
         | 
         | I don't know about 95% success rate, but I'd bet a lot of
         | people think it has at least a 70% success rate.
        
           | querez wrote:
           | When I was thought it, it was clearly pointed out to me that
           | chance of survival is ~5%, but increases significantly if an
           | AED can be used in time. I've also been told about the rib
           | cracking etc. Just as a counterpoint.
        
           | basisword wrote:
           | What use is this information though to someone performing
           | CPR? It's important in the sense that maybe better techniques
           | can be developed but if I need CPR it doesn't matter one bit
           | if the person doing it knows it's success rate. In fact
           | probably better they don't know. If they know the odds are
           | low perhaps they'll give up too soon.
        
             | WJW wrote:
             | I could see an argument that knowing the statistics could
             | help the CPR-giver in the aftermath. After all the patient
             | is _very_ likely to die and if the CPR-giver was under the
             | impression that it is likely to work, then they may feel a
             | lot of unwarranted guilt.
        
             | Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
             | To absolve themselves of guilt and self-doubt.
             | 
             | Someone who doesn't know that CPR has a very low success
             | rate might perform CPR on someone that ends up not
             | surviving and feeling guilty and full of self-doubt,
             | thinking they performed CPR incorrectly.
        
               | lazyasciiart wrote:
               | There was a Reddit thread from someone who had spent
               | years feeling that exact guilt for not saving her grandma
               | https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/1
               | 02k...
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | > What use is this information though to someone performing
             | CPR?
             | 
             | Possibly quite important to their psychological condition
             | afterwards, given what the very low effectiveness means.
        
           | throwaway173738 wrote:
           | I was taught it was not terribly effective except in case of
           | lightning strike. We weren't taught how to do it in
           | Mountaineering-Oriented First Aid because of that, and
           | because the leadership, wound care, trauma, and specific
           | conditions aspects of the course took almost the whole three
           | days.
        
             | duskwuff wrote:
             | CPR is particularly unlikely to be life-saving in a
             | wilderness scenario (like mountaineering) because
             | professional medical care may be many hours away. Even if
             | you can get a patient's heart restarted with CPR, they may
             | not survive to reach a hospital.
        
           | yarg wrote:
           | I know a dude who's a very competent ambo, he saw a man
           | collapse and immediately rebooted his heart with a single
           | perfect strike to the chest.
           | 
           | Beyond the prior state of the patient, technique can actually
           | matter as well - but the fact is that the vast majority of
           | people are never going to develop skills beyond "ah ah ah ah
           | staying alive".
        
             | BloominOnion wrote:
             | Sounds like he administered a precordial thump.
        
         | asperous wrote:
         | The article links a source and says "In real life, people
         | similarly believe that survival after CPR is over 75%"
        
           | bscphil wrote:
           | The real problem with the article is that it's conflating two
           | things: the absolute rate of survival for cardiac arrest
           | after CPR, and the relative rate of survival for cardiac
           | arrest after CPR (versus doing nothing).
           | 
           | > In real life, people similarly believe that survival after
           | CPR is over 75%.
           | 
           | I'm just a medically ignorant rando, my naive guess was that
           | people survive cardiac arrest without intervention 30% of the
           | time (per the article, the actual rate is 7.6%). Unless you
           | measure people's beliefs about this, you won't be able to
           | determine whether 75% is a good rate or a bad one.
           | 
           | Apparently bystander initiated CPR, out of the hospital,
           | increases those odds to 10%. That means that a _third_ more
           | people will survive if bystanders initiate CPR. That seems
           | ... really good to me? In the hospital, survival after CPR
           | goes up to 17%, which is an increase of 2.2 times! It 's
           | actually pretty comparable to someone having naive guesses of
           | 75% CPR survival vs 30% without CPR. (My actual guess was
           | that CPR made a difference about 20% of the time, so _all_
           | these numbers are way better than that.)
        
         | beams_of_light wrote:
         | I guess we're in a state where any reporting is meant to change
         | behaviors?
        
         | George83728 wrote:
         | When the American Red Cross trained me in CPR, they told me
         | this statistic, and told me that the reason they told me this
         | was so that I wouldn't blame myself if the victim dies anyway
         | (the most likely outcome.)
        
           | jeffrallen wrote:
           | This was true in a recent Swiss training as well.
        
         | ghostpepper wrote:
         | They link a study where they polled people shortly after a
         | family member was admitted to the ICU about the effectiveness
         | of CPR.
         | 
         | My partner is a nurse, so I already knew that the odds of
         | community-delivered CPR were about 10% (although now I'm
         | curious how those odds change when an AED is available) and
         | about the cracking of ribs.
         | 
         | I think what this article could've emphasized more is that more
         | people should learn about and consider Advance Directives and
         | DNR (do not resuscitate orders), particularly for patients who
         | are nearing the end of their natural life.
         | 
         | As it reads now it seems to suggest that bystanders should not
         | bother doing CPR in the community, which I think is incorrect
         | and borderline dangerous advice.
        
           | Gordonjcp wrote:
           | > (although now I'm curious how those odds change when an AED
           | is available)
           | 
           | AEDs are fucking magical.
           | 
           | They even talk to you to tell you how to use them.
           | 
           | If the need arises, get the AED and get going.
        
             | koheripbal wrote:
             | Isn't an AED only useful for tachycardia? I'm case of
             | drowning, heart attack, or most other causes of a stopped
             | heart, it isn't useful, correct?
        
               | dreamcompiler wrote:
               | Vtach and Vfib are the two shockable rhythms. Those are
               | common in many medical emergencies. Just because the
               | patient doesn't have a feelable pulse doesn't mean they
               | have "flatlined" and don't have a shockable rhythm! You
               | have to put the AED electrodes on their chest to be sure.
               | 
               | If the patient has truly flatlined (asystolic) then
               | shocking them won't bring them back. That only works in
               | the movies.
        
               | tux3 wrote:
               | I think AEDs can also pace these days if it's brady (but
               | not asystole)
        
               | JshWright wrote:
               | I'm not aware of any AEDs that will pace. There are
               | devices that can function as both an AED and an external
               | pacer. Most cardiac monitors used in ambulances have an
               | AED mode that can be used by EMTs, in addition to the
               | more advanced features (transcutaneous pacing,
               | cardioversion, manual defibrillation, etc). Those are the
               | sort of thing a layperson is going to come across as an
               | "AED" though.
        
               | tialaramex wrote:
               | The AED does not restart hearts, it can't do that, the
               | shock disrupts an abnormal rhythm, allowing the restart
               | to potentially take place automatically. But if your
               | heart has _actually_ just outright stopped, you are
               | basically dead.
               | 
               | Clinicians report as little as zero success for patients
               | in asystole (ie their heart has plain stopped). Some
               | studies report a little higher, but it's also possible
               | those rates are mistaken diagnosis, ie you see a flat-
               | looking ECG, you treat anyway, maybe 1% of patients
               | survive - but maybe that 1% were actually not really in
               | asystole.
               | 
               | If you have a heart attack, both an AED and CPR are
               | inappropriate, your heart is still working it's just that
               | the blood isn't going where it's needed. You need
               | immediate medical treatment. While an actual cardiac
               | arrest (which would warrant an AED and CPR) is much more
               | likely during a heart attack, it is not inevitable and
               | these treatments are _not_ prophylactic. Meanwhile your
               | focus needs to be on alerting other people to your
               | problem, so that they can get you medical treatment, and
               | if you do go into cardiac arrest they can perform CPR or
               | use an AED once that becomes appropriate.
        
               | dreamcompiler wrote:
               | > If you have a heart attack, both an AED and CPR are
               | inappropriate
               | 
               | This is a phrase that's easy to interpret in a
               | dangerously wrong way. Here's a clarification:
               | 
               | If you have a heart attack _and are still alive and
               | talking_ , both an AED and CPR are inappropriate.*
               | 
               | If you have a heart attack _and die_ , then both an AED
               | and CPR are _very_ appropriate and might bring you back.
               | 
               | * And even in this case the emergency response medics
               | _will_ put AED electrodes on your chest so it will be
               | ready to use in case you crash.
        
               | josephcsible wrote:
               | > you see a flat-looking ECG, you treat anyway, maybe 1%
               | of patients survive - but maybe that 1% were actually not
               | really in asystole.
               | 
               | Isn't that basically the no true Scotsman fallacy?
        
               | tedunangst wrote:
               | False positive paradox.
        
               | tialaramex wrote:
               | Maybe?
               | 
               | Sometimes, when our measurements differ from what we can
               | explain with our understanding of the universe, that's
               | because we didn't understand the universe properly. If
               | you put the Sun in the middle, your model of the solar
               | system is still weird nonsense with planets on their
               | circular orbits needing to swing backwards or accelerate
               | forwards for no reason - until you make the orbits
               | _ellipses_ instead and then it 's almost like fucking
               | clockwork.
               | 
               | But sometimes, you were just right, and the measurements
               | were off a bit, and there was no real physical
               | phenomenon, you were just bad at measuring.
               | 
               | So, maybe sometimes the human heart does actually stop,
               | yet it can successfully be restarted and then carry on as
               | normal, and the circumstances where this is true are just
               | fairly uncommon and when people are peering very
               | carefully at the results they never ran into one of these
               | rare cases. I cannot rule that out.
        
         | User23 wrote:
         | Right. Doing nothing has a near zero recovery rate for cardiac
         | arrest.
         | 
         | Any intervention needs to be judged against the real
         | alternatives and not some imaginary ideal case.
        
       | williamDafoe wrote:
       | The real point of CPR is to bridge their life while you rush to
       | get them an AED. Without the AED the chance of their heart
       | restarting permanently is vanishingly low ... Last few times I
       | had first responder training it was said to be less than 15%
       | chance of survival for a patient given CPR, and you'll only hear
       | about this if you ask.
       | 
       | The last time I had first responder training the guy sitting next
       | to me was drowned by a surfing accident but it was his great
       | fortune that on shore there was a national expert giving rapid
       | water rescue training and they had this guy out of the water and
       | his heart restarted in 5 minutes. So that is why he was taking
       | first responder training himself!
        
         | User23 wrote:
         | Thumpversion sometimes works too. Interestingly it was also
         | invented by Dr. Bernard Lown, who is best known for inventing
         | the DC defibrillator.
        
           | robbiep wrote:
           | It almost never works, unless you are seeing a witnessed
           | cardiac arrest and know how to administer. That is the right
           | 'indication' for a precordial thump, but the success rate is
           | still terrible.
        
       | randcraw wrote:
       | "An international team of researchers looked at 49,555 out-of-
       | hospital cardiac arrests that occurred in major U.S. and Canada
       | cities. They analyzed a key subgroup of these arrests, those that
       | occurred in public, were witnessed and were shockable. The
       | researchers found that nearly 66 percent of these victims
       | survived to hospital discharge after a shock delivered by a
       | bystander."
       | 
       | https://newsroom.heart.org/news/cardiac-arrest-survival-grea...
       | 
       | Obviously, 66% beats the 10% survival rate in the original
       | article (getting CPR alone from bystanders). The takeaway: AEDs
       | can make a BIG difference. Curious that the article failed to
       | mention that.
        
         | LorenPechtel wrote:
         | Also, a witnessed arrest likely means it's because the heart
         | stopped vs the heart could no longer operate because of other
         | problems. Also, vfib is far more salvageable than not operating
         | at all.
        
         | tinus_hn wrote:
         | There's a curious movement of people who spend their life
         | afraid they will 'endure' CPR and live to tell the tale. And
         | they come up with scare pieces like this one.
         | 
         | Sorry, if you go as far as getting a tattoo because you're so
         | afraid you will be resuscitated, you're in way over your head
         | and it's time to focus your energy on something constructive.
        
       | zdragnar wrote:
       | There's at least a small skew in the numbers as well. My wife was
       | instructed to perform CPR by a 911 dispatcher on someone she
       | found who had died in their sleep, and kept talking her through
       | the instructions until paramedics arrived.
       | 
       | I'm assuming this is counted in the broader "survival rate"
       | numbers. That's not to say that the overall message is wrong, but
       | CPR being administered to the dead, or those in medical distress
       | who wouldn't benefit from it, will obviously decrease the overall
       | effectiveness scores.
        
       | spacechild1 wrote:
       | I didn't know about the low success rate of CPR, but I have been
       | very well aware of the potential damage. When I was a paramedic
       | (as an alternative to military service) I once had to perform CPR
       | to an old lady and I heard her rips crack. One of the worst
       | experiences in those 9 months...
        
         | markoman wrote:
         | You're kinda burying the lede here... Was this woman
         | resuscitated by your efforts and do you know how long she
         | survived afterwards?
        
           | lotsofpulp wrote:
           | *and with what quality of life did she survive?
           | 
           | If I am 85 years old, maybe it is better for me to move on.
        
           | EA-3167 wrote:
           | CPR + Old Lady + Not in a hospital = Almost certainly didn't
           | survive, or live well if she did.
        
             | mikepurvis wrote:
             | Yeah, that's what I got from lifeguard training. The best
             | chance of doing anything positive with it is going to be on
             | an otherwise young and healthy person whose heart stopped
             | due to a very unusual trauma.
             | 
             | And CPR and artificial respiration is never a miraculous
             | eyes-opening recovery like in the movies-- it's pretty much
             | just putting oxygen in the brain to buy a few extra minutes
             | for the ambulance to arrive and take over.
        
             | spacechild1 wrote:
             | Correct :-(
        
               | EA-3167 wrote:
               | I'm sure you did everything you could, the sad fact of
               | life is that eventually it ends.
        
           | spacechild1 wrote:
           | Ah, sorry! I heard afterwards that she was declared dead when
           | she arrived in the hospital...
        
         | lkbm wrote:
         | I was taught that if you aren't breaking ribs, you're doing it
         | wrong.
        
           | karagenit wrote:
           | I don't think that's right. Sometimes the cartilage will
           | break which can sound similar, but broken ribs is a serious
           | condition that can lead to internal bleeding and such.
           | 
           | > Broken ribs are present in 3% of those who survive to
           | hospital discharge, and 15% of those who die in the hospital
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardiopulmonary_resuscitatio.
           | ..
        
             | lkbm wrote:
             | Ah, this was something like ten years ago, so it seems
             | likely that I'm misremembering. Thanks for the correction!
        
           | contingencies wrote:
           | I was taught you are supposed to break the cartilage.
        
       | null-shell wrote:
       | My father two years ago had a heart attack and a stroke, I found
       | him and yelled for my mom and sister, then started CPR until the
       | paramedics came. He survived and is doing very well, but it's
       | crazy to think there was only a 10%~ish chance of it working.
        
       | aaron695 wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | mjevans wrote:
       | Salient data from the article:
       | 
       | TL;DR CPR slightly increases the odds for someone otherwise
       | healthy and young but is much less effective for the old and the
       | chronically ill.
       | 
       | IIRC from prior CPR classes (own life data), 'correctly done'
       | chest compressions are extremely violent, they often break ribs
       | to get that compression of the heart between the rib cage and
       | spine. It's a last-ditch effort with COSTS. If there's an AED
       | around to use instead that would be FAR more preferable.
       | 
       | """ But the true odds are grim. In 2010 a review of 79 studies,
       | involving almost 150,000 patients, found that the overall rate of
       | survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest had barely changed
       | in thirty years. It was 7.6%.
       | 
       | Bystander-initiated CPR may increase those odds to 10%. Survival
       | after CPR for in-hospital cardiac arrest is slightly better, but
       | still only about 17%. The numbers get even worse with age. A
       | study in Sweden found that survival after out-of-hospital CPR
       | dropped from 6.7% for patients in their 70s to just 2.4% for
       | those over 90. Chronic illness matters too. One study found that
       | less than 2% of patients with cancer or heart, lung, or liver
       | disease were resuscitated with CPR and survived for six months.
       | """
        
         | starwatch wrote:
         | > 'correctly done' chest compressions are extremely violent.
         | 
         | For a good visual of this take a look at a LUCAS machine in
         | operation [1]. I'm a (retained) firefighter and have seen
         | paramedics deploy a LUCAS - it's quite a thing to behold.
         | 
         | > If there's an AED around to use instead that would be FAR
         | more preferable.
         | 
         | Sadly AED's aren't always appropriate. They need a "shockable
         | rhythm" - that is if your heart is in ventricular tachycardia
         | or ventricular fibrillation [2].
         | 
         | One interesting fact I recall reading (source long forgotten
         | ...) is that collapsed women are less likely to be helped with
         | AED's by passers by. This is because they feel uncomfortable
         | uncovering the chest to apply the AED pads.
         | 
         | [1]: https://youtu.be/G-oPJV1LYaE?t=314
         | 
         | [2]: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/heart-
         | arrhyth...
        
           | dreamcompiler wrote:
           | This is why you cannot learn CPR by watching people do it on
           | TV. The actor playing dead would be seriously injured if they
           | were receiving _proper_ CPR.
        
           | deanCommie wrote:
           | Holy shit...
           | 
           | I had _read_ that chest compressions for CPR are much more
           | aggressive than people imagine and rips being broken is not
           | uncommon.
           | 
           | The first few seconds of that clip though made me physically
           | wince with discomfort... wow!
        
           | EA-3167 wrote:
           | This is sadly true, a friend and colleague of mine passed
           | away about 7 years ago from sudden cardiac arrest. There was
           | an AED in the building, but unfortunately he was in asystole,
           | nothing there to shock.
           | 
           | Having said that AED's do save a lot of lives, but like CPR
           | they aren't magic.
        
         | Eji1700 wrote:
         | I swear this comes up every 2-5 years. It's insanely violent,
         | doesn't work as well on the elderly (like literally everything
         | else), and is still better than nothing. Things like this
         | almost feel like fear bait. It's intuitive that a procedure
         | performed on someone who's dying is ALWAYS going to be less
         | effective on the elderly. So long as it's not killing more
         | people than it helps (extremely unlikely given the whole
         | "you're not breathing/your heart has stopped" qualifier) it's
         | still an important thing to know.
        
           | henry2023 wrote:
           | About 93% of the time it's worst than nothing.
        
             | mjevans wrote:
             | For bystanders, the raw numbers from the article reflect a
             | 7.6% survival rate became a 10% survival rate. An absolute
             | improvement in about 24 out of 1000 cases, though for those
             | that do 'survive' maybe a 33% increase?
             | 
             | Though those numbers strongly hint at over simplified
             | variables. Is there other medical help available? (E.G. an
             | AED, maybe combined with CPR?) Is EMS close? Are they near
             | a medivac capable landing site and a level 1 trauma center?
             | How does this change across patient demographics?
             | 
             | For my own health, this goes back to end of life management
             | questions, can I recover or even improve to a degree if a
             | procedure is done? As someone with hopefully decades and
             | maybe even a chance at upload or archival if I live long
             | enough CPR probably is worth it for the cases where
             | survival is improved; but only if all the other options are
             | exhausted first.
        
             | dghlsakjg wrote:
             | The doing nothing treatment leads to death 100% of the time
             | since you don't do CPR on people with a beating heart.
        
             | pessimizer wrote:
             | _Slightly_ worse than nothing; saves a tiny bit of exercise
             | for someone. 7% of the time it saves a life.
        
           | michael1999 wrote:
           | Quality of life is not a boolean variable. "CPR-induced
           | consciousness" sounds like a truly terrible way to go, and
           | likely to cause real suffering in the practitioner/torturer.
        
           | SapporoChris wrote:
           | My nephew performed CPR on my mother (his grandmother). It
           | wasn't successful, he gets to live with the psychological
           | consequences. I imagine not acting would have worse
           | psychological consequences, but only because society has
           | built up unrealistic expectations regarding CPR.
        
         | frederikvs wrote:
         | > If there's an AED around to use instead that would be FAR
         | more preferable.
         | 
         | AEDs still require chest compressions. In fact, they'll give
         | you rhythm to follow and talk you through it.
         | 
         | I would expect a very similar rate of injuries from
         | compressions - perhaps a bit less if the AED means the
         | compressions don't need to be performed for the same length of
         | time.
        
         | hnthrowaway8860 wrote:
         | If you are ever in the situation, what will you do?
         | 
         | I will certainly peform CPR. Even after reading the article.
         | Why? Most likely the person is dead anyway, no harm done. But
         | if I don't do it, chances are their family sue me for millions.
         | Especially in the US. Unlikely to succeed, but the risk is far
         | from 0. If they win, my life is ruined. I the face of that, I
         | might even consider a settlement for a large sum. Also
         | terrible. So yeah, sorry old ladies.
         | 
         | Such articles, a much as I appreciate the educative effects,
         | could even make this worse, since if it's more widely known
         | then I could get sued in either case. Like, I did CPR, lady
         | dies anyway but there were clear signs that she suffered.
         | Great, now I'll have a lawsuit in addition to the trauma of
         | having crushed the ribs of an old lady.
        
           | mjevans wrote:
           | I'm not really fit enough to compress properly, nor have I
           | been in CPR training recently.
           | 
           | In an emergency my support role would be better spent on
           | comms support or managing other trauma.
        
         | asdfjasgoinio wrote:
         | >If there's an AED around to use instead that would be FAR more
         | preferable.
         | 
         | This is dangerously wrong. Availability of an AED does _NOT_
         | eliminate the need to know CPR.
         | 
         | A defibrillator is useful only for certain types of heart
         | rhythm, namely v-tach and v-fib. It is of no use whatsoever for
         | other rhythms. The AED itself will detect the type of rhythm
         | and will only administer a shock if it is indicated. If the AED
         | does not detect a shockable rhythm, the machine instruct the
         | user to perform CPR.
         | 
         | https://www.proacls.com/wiki/acls-algorithms/shockable-rhyth...
         | 
         | Even if an AED is available, it will not arrive immediately.
         | Even a short lapse in chest compressions can cause lasting
         | damage. It is necessary to give CPR for even the few seconds
         | until the AED is connected.
         | 
         | https://www.redcross.org/take-a-class/cpr/performing-cpr/cpr...
        
       | three14 wrote:
       | Complete anecdata, but a few months ago a neighbor of mine
       | successfully resuscitated another neighbor with CPR. There was an
       | AED present, but from what I heard, it did not recommend a shock.
       | The person who collapsed is around 70 years old. Sometimes, it
       | does work! There clearly are some cases where it would be crazy
       | not to try it.
        
         | JshWright wrote:
         | CPR alone is very, very unlikely to reverse cardiac arrest.
         | It's possible your neighbor lost consciousness, but wasn't
         | actually without a pulse, and CPR just woke them up.
        
       | dheera wrote:
       | I'm a survivor of cardiac arrest and was resuscitated with an AED
       | and CPR. I've gone through a lot but I'm glad to be alive, have
       | an implanted ICD now, and I'm glad some employee didn't refuse to
       | do CPR on me.
       | 
       | I wasn't conscious for the event and the entire following week,
       | but they didn't break any of my ribs. Maybe the AED allowed them
       | to be less violent.
        
         | zahma wrote:
         | Sounds like you were fortunate to have multiple people around,
         | an AED nearby, and someone well-trained. You're probably right
         | that AED helped prevent physical damage, though that may also
         | be due to good technique and or your anatomy. The sooner that
         | the AED goes on and restarts sinus rhythm, the fewer
         | compressions required.
         | 
         | Happy to hear you are doing better.
        
           | dheera wrote:
           | Yep it happened at a boat race, so there were paramedics
           | already on-site. On one hand I was told to avoid competitive-
           | intensity sports in the future, but I was also super
           | fortunate that it all played out at a boat race and not while
           | climbing some mountain. And having the ICD means I can still
           | hike non-strenuous mountains.
        
       | anonymousiam wrote:
       | I was dead on the street at 15 after being hit by a car (my
       | fault). A good Samaritan stopped, administered CPR and
       | resuscitated me. Forty six years later and I never got to thank
       | him. I only know his first name (Mark).
       | 
       | CPR is a good thing and hopefully this article will not make
       | people think twice before administering it.
        
         | SkyPuncher wrote:
         | One of the most interesting insights I learned, second-hand
         | from my wife's medical education, is the essentially bi-modal
         | distribution of CPR need. Note: This is an observation based on
         | memory. It may or may not be actually true.
         | 
         | * Group One is people like you. Otherwise healthy people who've
         | had some sort of crazy event. CGR gets your body through an
         | acute moment so it can heal and recover on its own.
         | 
         | * Group Two. People that are already sick or very sick. Cardiac
         | arrest is essentially their body failing. Even if CPR is
         | successful, they're have lots of physical trauma that is
         | extremely hard to overcome. Another cardiac arrest is
         | inevitable.
         | 
         | The article does a terrible job of identifying this difference.
         | If you're a member of the general public and you need to give
         | CPR, there's a huge chance you're giving it to someone in Group
         | One. Most people in Group Two are already hospitalized or in
         | some sort of care setting.
        
           | sebii wrote:
           | This distinction was my take away from the article.
        
           | LorenPechtel wrote:
           | I think there are really three groups:
           | 
           | 1) Healthy people, heart stopped by some traumatic event.
           | Survival odds good.
           | 
           | 2) Reasonably healthy people, heart attack. Moderate survival
           | odds.
           | 
           | 3) People who were already sick. Odds low, success likely
           | isn't worth it.
        
           | snowwrestler wrote:
           | Yes this was a point of particular emphasis in swiftwater
           | rescue classes since drowning is one of the mechanisms of
           | injury for which CPR can work well to bring someone back who
           | appears dead (not breathing, hard-to-find pulse).
           | 
           | It's also a scenario in which the breathing part of CPR is
           | particularly valuable. A lot of front-country CPR courses de-
           | emphasize administering breaths in favor of sustaining chest
           | compressions.
        
           | iudqnolq wrote:
           | > Most people in Group Two are already hospitalized or in
           | some sort of care setting.
           | 
           | No. Disabled and sick people are all around you. This is why
           | you should have been taught in your CPR class to check for a
           | medical ID tag that might, for example, say that the person
           | doesn't want to be resuscitated.
           | 
           | Also just because someone is disabled doesn't necessarily
           | mean they don't want CPR. That's their choice and not yours,
           | just respect it. Denying disabled people CPR without consent
           | during the pandemic in the UK and Canada did significant
           | damage to public education around when you might want not
           | want CPR.
           | 
           | I learned CPR on a Wilderness First Responder course. They
           | keep adding more medical training because the wilderness is
           | increasingly accessible to disabled and sick people. The
           | sidewalk in the middle of civilization is much easier to get
           | to than that.
           | 
           | Edit: This is a reason however to continue CPR longer in
           | certain cases like drowning (especially in cold water) and
           | lightning strikes.
        
             | scythe wrote:
             | >Disabled and sick people are all around you.
             | 
             | You are conflating "disabled" with "dying". A deaf person
             | will have a decent chance of coming back to normal if they
             | survive CPR. An 85-year-old with heart disease will most
             | likely not. The parent was a little vague, but if you read
             | the article the context is clear.
        
               | iudqnolq wrote:
               | Do you believe most 85-year-olds with heart disease are
               | in a hospital and not in public?
               | 
               | Edit: Furthermore the person I replied two defined group
               | 1 as "otherwise healthy". So I think it's fair for me to
               | have inferred they meant what they said and their only
               | other group includes "sick and very sick" people.
               | 
               | Edit2: Realize I had a significant typo. My post was
               | phrased as a statement and not a question. I added the
               | "Do [original]?"
        
               | cstrahan wrote:
               | Can't you be both deaf and healthy? Or missing a leg and
               | healthy? I don't see how "disabled" implies "not
               | otherwise healthy".
               | 
               | I often run into people who are deaf, or an amputee, or
               | have type 1 diabetes, etc, but I rarely come across
               | someone that (to my knowledge) has a substantial illness.
               | But I live in a city where I very, very rarely run into
               | someone much over 40 (at that point they are likely to
               | have been married and had children, and the thing nearly
               | everyone does here is move into the suburbs once they're
               | married with children).
               | 
               | I suspect that where you live makes a huge impact on
               | whether or not you're surrounded by unhealthy/ill people.
        
               | iudqnolq wrote:
               | You may not run into people over 40. But most people over
               | 40 absolutely live in ordinary communities.
               | 
               | The original point I replied to suggested everyone at a
               | high risk for bad CPR outcomes is in a hospital. Now
               | we're talking about suburbs.
        
             | bb611 wrote:
             | I think your comment isn't being well received because it
             | represents fairly stark national differences.
             | 
             | In the US, a DNR is primarily for a medical setting with
             | staff who've already identified you and confirmed its
             | veracity. Withdrawing medical care creates massive
             | liability so providers are going to make sure they got it
             | right before stopping. Lay people do not have the knowledge
             | to make these kinds of decisions.
             | 
             | I've never been taught to even check for a bracelet during
             | any of my CPR trainings, and my wife who's been an EMT for
             | 10 years tells me they will still run the code after being
             | presented a DNR until until they receive a clear
             | confirmation from their medical director to cease.
        
               | iudqnolq wrote:
               | I'm from the US. I've definitely heard US EMTs talk about
               | ignoring DNRs. I think that's pretty unethical.
               | 
               | I was taught in the US to check for a medical ID tag.
               | You've already covered the locations for one bracelet and
               | a necklace during your pulse check. You'll want to know
               | if your patient, for example, caries an EpiPen for a
               | serious allergy.
               | 
               | DNRs are underutilized in the US. As this article points
               | out CPR might not be worth it even if you aren't in
               | hospice care. A DNR would invalidate implied consent so
               | technically doing CPR after seing a DNR tag would be
               | assault.
        
           | smorrebrod wrote:
           | Yes, the article says that half of the people resuscitated by
           | CPR wished it didn't happen. The linked paper explicitly says
           | this figure is valid for in-hospital administered CPR, so
           | definitely people belonging to group 2.
        
         | stefantalpalaru wrote:
         | [dead]
        
         | jeroenhd wrote:
         | The risks and problems are a lot worse for old people than for
         | teenagers. The story in this article is allot more complicated
         | than "Don't try to revive toddlers or always revive comatose
         | 110 year olds". As important as CPR is, people who will be
         | performing it deserve to know 9 out of 10 people will still end
         | up dead. Nobody gains anything from a bystander blaming himself
         | for the death of someone they could never have saved.
         | 
         | For many survivors, life after CPR is a gate worse than death.
         | I'll try to apply CPR should I ever need to, but if I were to
         | end up a vegetable or permanentlysufferimg husk like so many
         | people, I'm pretty sure I'd be begging for euthanasia if I
         | still can.
         | 
         | I may not agree with their decision, but I understand why the
         | nurse in the story may have refused. If I get to live to a ripe
         | old age, I'd get whatever do-not-recussitate paperwork I might
         | need.
        
         | lamontcg wrote:
         | > I was dead on the street at 15
         | 
         | Big difference between 15 and 85 or 95.
        
         | riceart wrote:
         | Successful resuscitation after traumatic arrest is extremely
         | rare. It is more rare than bystander field CPR administered to
         | those that are not in actual arrest (unconscious but with a
         | perfusing rhythm).
         | 
         | What was the confirmation of arrest? I have been called
         | numerous to bedside for in hospital "arrest" that turned out to
         | be assessment error - that is with trained medical
         | professionals.
        
           | samtho wrote:
           | The value of CPR by is rarely derived from successful
           | resuscitation. In most cases, the person performing CPR is
           | someone who was trained briefly on chest compressions and
           | mouth-to-mouth which to be performed until a EMT arrives or
           | an AED becomes available. The purpose of this procedure is to
           | get some, however small, bit of oxygen into the patient to
           | prevent brain damage.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | whatever1 wrote:
         | That is why statistics are a horrible tool for decision making.
         | 
         | There are so many things that on a statistical basis make no
         | sense. Yet on an individual level it is a life-or-death
         | difference.
        
           | jdietrich wrote:
           | > That is why statistics are a horrible tool for decision
           | making.
           | 
           | Statistical illiteracy is a horrible tool for decision
           | making. Statistics is the _only_ tool for decision making
           | other than pure guesswork, because all decisions based on
           | data are statistical inferences. If something doesn 't make
           | sense on a statistical basis, it's almost certainly the case
           | that the statistical analysis was naive.
           | 
           | A statistical inference of the probability of survival of a
           | particular patient that doesn't take into account any
           | characteristics of that patient is naive in the extreme. We
           | aren't interested in the average patient, we care about the
           | average patient _whose risk profile most closely resembles
           | our patient_.
        
         | ransom1538 wrote:
         | I took CPR class quite a few times. One thing I learned, if
         | they are young, there is a good chance it will work. If they
         | are old, there isn't much hope.
        
           | FireBeyond wrote:
           | As a paramedic, somewhat. It's also to do with how -quickly-
           | CPR starts. What -typically- happens (though by no means
           | always) is the heart goes from a normal sinus rhythm to VT
           | (ventricular tachycardia) to VF (ventricular fibrillation) to
           | asystole / PEA (pulseless electrical activity) or similar.
           | 
           | Now by all means getting ROSC (return of spontaneous
           | circulation) back doesn't mean everything is golden (indeed
           | many patients re-arrest between home and the hospital),
           | because we haven't fixed the underlying cause (plaque in the
           | arteries, etc.)
           | 
           | But similarly, many younger or young adult arrests are often
           | due to congenital defects or issues, diagnosed or not. We
           | obviously don't fix that in the field either.
           | 
           | Where your statement is definitely much more true is in
           | pediatric arrests. The vast majority of pediatric arrests are
           | respiratory arrests that deteriorate into cardiac arrest - be
           | it FBAO (foreign body airway obstruction), near-drowning, or
           | similar. If we can fix the root problem - dislodge that
           | foreign body (either by removal, or from the force of
           | compressions), or at least allow enough air through, either
           | naturally or by ventilation, to get to the lungs and re-
           | perfuse the blood, we can usually get ROSC and, because we
           | -have- "solved" (temporarily or otherwise) the root cause,
           | those patients, thankfully, tend not to re-arrest.
        
         | throwaway049 wrote:
         | Trauma arrest has a particularly low survive-to-discharge rate
         | so you beat the odds. Speaking as an EMT, we will make every
         | effort anyways - we like beating the odds too!
        
         | blastro wrote:
         | CPR saved my dad's life as well
        
         | n8henrie wrote:
         | CPR successfully resuscitating a traumatic arrest is _highly_
         | unusual. Consider yourself anomalously lucky.
        
           | JshWright wrote:
           | Especially CPR alone. Assuming a defibrillator wasn't used,
           | there's a non-zero chance this wasn't actually a cardiac
           | arrest, but rather a loss of consciousness and the bystander
           | couldn't find a pulse that was actually present (finding a
           | pulse in a high stress situation is not at all easy to do).
        
         | gerdesj wrote:
         | It is a good thing: obviously - you were resuscitated.
         | 
         | I did a first aid course a few months back and one of the
         | attendees (six in total) had done a similar job for a colleague
         | a few years back. Their description was quite something. To be
         | told first hand what happens, corroborating the instructor is a
         | lesson and a half. It isn't pleasant at all and I won't spell
         | it out here. As well as CPR we covered quite a few other things
         | and you are far more likely to encounter choking and the
         | correct response is far more likely to have a good outcome than
         | CPR, so first aid courses are a very good thing.
         | 
         | If I end up having to deliver CPR, I will do it without
         | hesitation. I will do the checks first, mindful that I will be
         | performing what amounts to ABH. A small success rate is better
         | than nothing.
         | 
         | OK so something like 5-10% is the real success rate for CBR.
         | Now, would you be interested in something like 75%?
         | 
         | DEFIBRILLATOR.
         | 
         | A defib will talk you through how to use it but a short course
         | will get you going much quicker. They are just like jump
         | starting a car but instead of croc clips, the wires are
         | connected to sticky pads that you stick on the person. They are
         | battery powered and can be very small and portable. They are
         | nothing like as big as you see on old school TV dramas.
         | 
         | Upside: ~75% chance of resuss. compared to around 5-10% for
         | CPR. No need to potentially break ribs or other unsavoury side
         | effects of battering a person. Downside: Costs around PS1000 a
         | pop - they are reusable.
         | 
         | If you own a business, why not grab one, slap it on the wall
         | near to the first aid kit and get the staff clued up. When you
         | get to a certain age (over zero) why not get one at home?
         | 
         | I have not yet followed my own advice yet but I think I will
         | quite soon! Have a chat about it with your staff, family and
         | whoever will listen.
         | 
         | I think that CPR should be likened to camping without a tent,
         | in the Arctic. A defib: glamping, with free Cava! That said, I
         | will still cause ABH on someone that I deem needs it if nothing
         | else is to hand.
        
           | quantumwoke wrote:
           | I appreciate the exuberant tone of this message but it's not
           | quite correct. Defibrillators can get upwards of 60% success
           | rate if given in conjunction with effective CPR. There's no
           | getting around breaking ribs - defibrillators have to charge,
           | you have to check the pulse and oxygen has to be given. You
           | can't leave someone pulseless for 60 seconds while you fetch
           | and charge the defibrillator as they will die. All the first
           | aid tools are used in concert.
        
             | JshWright wrote:
             | >There's no getting around breaking ribs
             | 
             | You're usually "just" dislocating the ribs from the sternum
             | (and often tearing the cartilage at that joint). Doesn't
             | feel any less crunchy though...
        
             | groestl wrote:
             | Also, there are shockable and non-shockable heart rhythms.
             | A defibrillator is not a catch-all solution.
        
               | KineticLensman wrote:
               | (I have Ventricular Fibrillation and have been de-fibb'd
               | twice, the second time by an implanted device).
               | 
               | Exactly! Defibs can't restart a 'stopped' heart. They
               | instead resynchronise the muscle fibres when the heart's
               | internal rhythm has got messed up for whatever reason.
               | They can (try to) fix a heart that is quivering rather
               | than beating cleanly.
               | 
               | But the defibs themselves can sense the difference and
               | won't apply a shock if the rhythm isn't shockable. You
               | should always get one out and let it try to shock if it
               | can.
               | 
               | Coming back to the main point, when I had my first VF
               | episode, CPR kept me alive long enough for the staff at
               | the place where it happened to find their defib. The
               | doctor at the hospital who implanted my ICD told me that
               | surviving an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest was something
               | like a 1 in 5 chance. The surgical team were clearly of
               | the view that I was very lucky to be there. And, yes, I
               | got broken ribs. This was the most painful thing. I had
               | too sleep sitting up because getting up from lying gown
               | was too painful. Sneezing (and laughing) were also fairly
               | painful. But a small price to pay.
        
           | mullingitover wrote:
           | I think they work best in combination. The CPR can keep your
           | brain alive long enough for the defib to arrive.
        
           | cykros wrote:
           | Indeed. They've been available on Amazon since Amazon was
           | still known so much as a book store that it made headlines
           | that you could get them there, what with their not being
           | books and all.
        
           | angrygoat wrote:
           | +1 on doing a first aid course. It's a day or two, it's
           | interesting, and it's a good thing that human beings should
           | be prepared and willing to help one another.
           | 
           | I'm 41 and I've now twice encountered a situation where I
           | should give first aid. The first time was a fatal collision
           | between a bicyclist and a pedestrian, in an affluent suburb:
           | there were actual doctors working on the pedestrian, so after
           | checking an ambulance had been called, I left - no point in
           | gawking.
           | 
           | But I was struck by how little I could have done to help if
           | I'd encountered the accident by myself. So I took a first aid
           | course as soon as I could.
           | 
           | A few years later I was cycling and came across a fellow
           | rider who'd come off and landed on his head; he was just
           | lying there in the path. It was amazing how the training
           | kicked in - I checked for danger to myself, established he
           | couldn't respond to me, established he was breathing,
           | carefully put him in the recovery position, used my bike to
           | wall him off a bit so nobody would ride over him, then went
           | for help (I didn't have a phone on me, the one time I
           | happened not to have it!)
           | 
           | The injured cyclist was fine in the end, he came around after
           | a few minutes and it was then a matter of persuading him to
           | wait until the ambulance folks arrived; he had no concept
           | that he'd been out for multiple minutes, I think from his
           | perspective it had only been a moment. I'm glad I was able to
           | help though. So yeah, if you are able, do a first aid course.
        
           | aaron695 wrote:
           | [dead]
        
           | richardjam73 wrote:
           | You can now get single use defibrillators that are cheaper
           | but they have a limited life span.
        
             | cmcaleer wrote:
             | All defibs do. The battery and pads need replaced every few
             | years.
        
       | sokoloff wrote:
       | I read this brief but powerful related story of compassion and
       | leadership last year and feel like it's worth sharing here:
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/tjwebbmd/status/1557229120131588098 (warning:
       | covers aspects of the death of a young child)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-30 23:02 UTC)