Effectiveness of mouth-to-mouth resuscitation performed by young adolescents on a mannequin.

Bystanders are reluctant to perform basic life support (BLS) because of fear of failure and of infection, especially with mouth-to-mouth resuscitation (MTM). A possibility to enhance willingness could be the giving of MTM or BLS instructions at a very early age to the potential rescuers. The study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of MTM with respect to ventilation and the time needed for performing 5 ventilations. In this study, MTM was performed on a mannequin by 57 children and adolescents aged 10 and 14 years. This study showed that 14-year-olds effectively perform MTM, reaching the recommended tidal volumes. Ten-year-old children have already developed sufficient motor skills for MTM with no significant time differences compared with the 14-year-olds. However, physical demands may be rather high at this age. Further long-term studies are needed to investigate clinical benefits of early teaching of MTM or BLS that may lead to international guidelines with low age limits.

Comparison of mouth-to-mouth resuscitation and Combitube ventilation in a bench model.

CONTEXT: In addition to heart massage, the primary goal of cardiopulmonary resuscitation is efficient oxygenation and ventilation. OBJECTIVE: To compare the ease of learning and handling of standard mouth-to-mouth resuscitation with the Combitube (Tyco Healthcare Nellcor, Pleasanton, CA) ventilation. METHODS: After a 30 minute theoretical introduction and demonstration of mouth-to-mouth resuscitation and use of the Combitube in mannequins, following American Heart Association guidelines, 26 adolescent school children (15 of them 14 years old, 11 of them 10 years old) undertook two ventilation trials, each consisting of five single ventilations, with each technique. Only the second trial with each technique was evaluated. Qualitative implementation (grades: very good, good, failed) was evaluated, several procedure-related time points were recorded, and tidal volumes (ml) were measured. RESULTS: With mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, the time interval until start of first ventilation was 36.5 seconds shorter than with the Combitube (P < 0.001). With the Combitube, the time needed for five single ventilations was 6.4 seconds less than with mouth-to-mouth resuscitation (P < 0.001) and mean tidal volumes were higher (mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, 450 +/- 384 ml, versus Combitube, 735 +/- 358 ml; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Most of the school children performed both techniques to a high qualitative level. The study shows that mouth-to-mouth resuscitation and use of the Combitube have equal ease of learning, a precondition for proficient retention of skills. Tidal volumes were significantly higher with the Combitube and, not surprisingly, the time interval until the start of first ventilation was significantly shorter with mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. Regardless of the ventilation technique or device, we believe that subsequent retraining of ventilation skills is very important.