Just seen the new advert on tv with Vinnie Jones and was wondering if anyone has been taught this recently on a first-aid course or has it made its way through to Padi Rescue/EFR?
I seem to recall being told it was coming on a previous course many moons ago. Basically it was working on the principle that something is better than nothing. If people can be encouraged to have a go rather than do nothing through fear or embarrassment then maybe someone might be in with a chance that otherwise would have none.
It's designed for people who are worried or 'scared' by the prospect of mouth to mouth... I can't see it bing removed from an efr course because as a good PADI rescue diver I always carry my pocket mask.... Unless its in the garage
....or the casualty is a fit young lady "oh would you look at that... I've left my pocket mask at home ... again"
As a GP we have to do a refresher CPR course every year and mouth-to-mouth has been optional for over 2 decades and in the last few years it is categorised as "inadvisible" because of need of self-protection. Obviously, in a clinical setting we have other devices to maintain airway and respiration but no one is now expected to do mouth-to-mouth on a total stranger. Remember, if someone's airway is blocked, mouth-to-mouth achieves very little. Neither does it help to stop aspiration of vomit. On the other hand, restarting the heart successfully could re-establish spontaneous respiration. In fact, staff protection issues now far outweigh everything else, including patient confidentiality in some cases. In the past, if a patient was HIV or Hepatitis B/C positive, this information was confidential and not highlighted. Now, it is a rule to make sure that all clinical staff - doctors, nurses, phlebotomists etc - who come into direct contact with patients have to know about such risks.
Strange that I was still being taught it last year on a first aid course run by St. Johns if you consider medical professionals deem it "inadvisable". I wonder why???
My clinical CPR/life support training was renewed recently. We were indeed told were were not expected to perform direct breaths. Also the rate of compressions has increased form that of nelly the elephant to the Beegees stayin alive. It is also now 30 compressions to 2 breaths. As Steppy said though in clinical settings there are bags and masks which allow for safe ventilation of patients. (but not defibrilators as that would cost uk.gov too much, even though every station and supermarket has one) C
Nobody actually says it is inadvisible directly, but the tutor will make it clear that we do not have to do it if we do not want to and going on to explain the risk of exposure to body fluids. They teach us all on the plastic dummy of course because it can be disinfected between operators and does not have any body fluids. It just makes everyone feel better. Let me put it more clearly. In 33 years as a doctor I have taken part in close to a 100 CPRs ( a lot while I was in casualty and as an anaesthetist for 6 years) and NEVER done a mouth-to-mouth on any patient. I also had no intention of ever doing one and I can tell you that it is true of almost all my contemporary colleagues - we have discussed this among ourselves several times. The only exceptions have been where chiildren are involved and fortunately on the few occasions where I was involved in a CPR of a child, it was in a hospital setting and all equipment was readily available. What I have said above is a simple fact and not a 'confession'. If I refuse to do mouth-to-mouth on a patient and he/she dies later, I will not have the slightest remorse. This is because of 2 things 1) As a GP, I know that the chances of mouth-to-mouth in itself making the difference between life and death are practically zero despite what they show you in movies. 2) Like almost all my colleagues, I firmly believe that there is a limit to we can stretch ourselves to help a patient and none of us are prepared to go beyond.
I am sorry, but you are misinformed. Every GP surgery is required to have a functioning defibrillator that is regularly serviced and dated. Its use is part of the yearly CPR update we receive Likewise all Out-of-hours PCCs are required to have it, as well as the official cars visiting patients out-of-hours.
My apologies. Not in Dental surgeries. HTM0105 requires we re steralise and pack instruments every 30 days (in hospitals it is up to 1 yr I understand), but no defib. On the + side we are opposite Asda who have one C
Having just done the rescue diver course and EFR refresher course (which included EAR including using barriers) I was interested in how up to date the information I recieved was. I found this reference. http://www.resus.org.uk/pages/guide.htm What I was taught was exactly in line with those recommendations, which still include EAR. The course also made clear the low probability of recovery of a non breathing casualty, EAR or no EAR, and that compression alone was of benefit, and the much better prospect for a casualty if a defib is available. Disposable barrier masks are in a package marginally bigger than a condom, and marginally more expensive. Both filter and non return valve versions are available. Harry
Last year we were told if for any reason you could not or did not want to give rescue breaths then just do the compressions. Obvious risk of infection or contamination from toxic substance were examples given.
I did my First Aid at Work course recently and as others have said, we were also taught that the mouth-to-mouth was optional. When questioned why, we were told that the chest compressions should force enough chest movement that enough air should be drawn into the lungs by doing the compressions alone.... I found this surprising, but I have to assume that their knowledge is much greater than mine!! (My training was performed by the British Red Cross)
I do my FAW with the ambulance service - was certainly told last summer whilst mouth-to-mouth was prefereable to just compressions, if you ware uncomfortable performing mouth-to-mouth compressions alone were acceptable. TBH even the previous time (4 years ago) when I did my course we were told that compressions alone would still be effective in unable/unwilling to perform mouth-to-mouth.
The problem is that this so-called "kiss of life" has acquired so much historical publicity that tutors feel reluctant - almost guilty - not to mention it. But in reality, the limited (if any, in most cases) benefit of MtM is far outweighed by the risks to the operator. MtM might be acceptable in one-off situations where the victim is a relative, friend or otherwise well known to the operator but to expect healthcare workers like doctors, nurses, paramedics etc (who are likely to administer CPR repeatedly during the course of their jobs) to be prepared to do it in any situation is unsafe, unrealistic and in my book, completely unacceptable.
I agree with Steppenwolf, and TBH would never expect health professionals to be giving random people mtm... A known diving buddy however deserves every opportunity to be rescued... Unless they're known to be addled with disease...
