Effect of severe acute respiratory syndrome on bystander willingness to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR)--is compression-only preferred to standard CPR?

OBJECTIVE: The effect of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak on the willingness of laypersons to provide bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) using standard CPR (SCPR) or compression-only CPR (CCPR) was evaluated. The preferred type of SCPR in the post-SARS era was assessed. METHODS: A descriptive study was conducted through telephone interviews. Persons who attended a CPR course from January 2000 through February 2003 answered a structured questionnaire. The respondents' willingness to perform SCPR or CCPR during a witnessed cardiac arrest of an average adult stranger or that of a family member in the pre-SARS and the post-SARS era was surveyed. RESULTS: Data for 305 respondents were processed. For the scenario of cardiac arrest of an average stranger, more respondents would perform CCPR than SCPR in the pre-SARS era (83.6% vs. 61.3%, p <0.001) and in the post-SARS era (77.4% vs. 28.9%, p <0.001). In the scenario of the cardiac arrest of a family member, more would perform CCPR than SCPR in the pre-SARS era (92.8% vs. 87.2%, p <0.001) and in the post-SARS era (92.8% vs. 84.9%, p <0.001). After SARS, more respondents were unwilling to perform SCPR (p <0.001) and CCPR (p <0.001) on strangers. After SARS, more respondents were unwilling to perform SCPR on a family member (p = 0.039), but there was no difference in the preference to perform CCPR (p = 1.000). CONCLUSIONS: Concerns about SARS adversely affected the willingness of respondents to perform SCPR or CCPR on strangers and to perform SCPR on family members. Compression-only CPR was preferred to SCPR to resuscitate strangers experiencing cardiac arrest after the emergence of SARS.

Doctor-based basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation course: an alternative to the conventional approach.

United Christian Hospital initiated a doctor-based cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) Program. It is a two-hour, focused, adult CPR course, suitable for adults of different age groups and of different educational levels. The course was rated highly by the participants. Most trainees acquired CPR knowledge and skills, and had confidence to perform CPR. This type of training could improve the rate of bystander CPR for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients in this region. Avoiding the complexity and pass-fail psychology that is used in the traditional CPR training curriculum, it can be an alternative to the traditional four-hour instructor-based Basic Life Support (BLS) course.