Options
ABC versus CAB for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a prospective, randomized simulator-based trial
Auteur(s)
Marsch, Stephan U
Semmer, Norbert
Zobrist, Roger
Hunziker, Patrick R
Hunziker, Sabina
Date de parution
2013-9-6
In
Swiss Medical Weekly
Vol.
13856
No
143
De la page
1
A la page
11
Résumé
QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY: After years of advocating
ABC (Airway-Breathing-Circulation), current guidelines
of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) recommend CAB
(Circulation-Airway-Breathing). This trial compared ABC
with CAB as initial approach to CPR from the arrival of
rescuers until the completion of the first resuscitation cycle.
METHODS: 108 teams, consisting of two physicians each,
were randomized to receive a graphical display of either the
ABC algorithm or the CAB algorithm. Subsequently teams
had to treat a simulated cardiac arrest. Data analysis was
performed using video recordings obtained during simulations.
The primary endpoint was the time to completion
of the first resuscitation cycle of 30 compressions and two
ventilations.
RESULTS: The time to execution of the first resuscitation
measure was 32 ± 12 seconds in ABC teams and 25 ±
10 seconds in CAB teams (P = 0.002). 18/53 ABC teams
(34%) and none of the 55 CAB teams (P = 0.006) applied
more than the recommended two initial rescue breaths
which caused a longer duration of the first cycle of 30
compressions and two ventilations in ABC teams (31 ± 13
vs.23 ± 6 sec; P = 0.001). Overall, the time to completion
of the first resuscitation cycle was longer in ABC teams (63
± 17 vs. 48 ± 10 sec; P <0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: This randomized controlled trial found
CAB superior to ABC with an earlier start of CPR and a
shorter time to completion of the first 30:2 resuscitation
cycle. These findings endorse the change from ABC to
CAB in international resuscitation guidelines.
ABC (Airway-Breathing-Circulation), current guidelines
of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) recommend CAB
(Circulation-Airway-Breathing). This trial compared ABC
with CAB as initial approach to CPR from the arrival of
rescuers until the completion of the first resuscitation cycle.
METHODS: 108 teams, consisting of two physicians each,
were randomized to receive a graphical display of either the
ABC algorithm or the CAB algorithm. Subsequently teams
had to treat a simulated cardiac arrest. Data analysis was
performed using video recordings obtained during simulations.
The primary endpoint was the time to completion
of the first resuscitation cycle of 30 compressions and two
ventilations.
RESULTS: The time to execution of the first resuscitation
measure was 32 ± 12 seconds in ABC teams and 25 ±
10 seconds in CAB teams (P = 0.002). 18/53 ABC teams
(34%) and none of the 55 CAB teams (P = 0.006) applied
more than the recommended two initial rescue breaths
which caused a longer duration of the first cycle of 30
compressions and two ventilations in ABC teams (31 ± 13
vs.23 ± 6 sec; P = 0.001). Overall, the time to completion
of the first resuscitation cycle was longer in ABC teams (63
± 17 vs. 48 ± 10 sec; P <0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: This randomized controlled trial found
CAB superior to ABC with an earlier start of CPR and a
shorter time to completion of the first 30:2 resuscitation
cycle. These findings endorse the change from ABC to
CAB in international resuscitation guidelines.
Identifiants
Type de publication
Resource Types::text::journal::journal article
