Aibu to be a bit shocked at St Johns Ambulance teaching of CPR?

[Hairyfairy01]

Dd recently attended at group where St Johns Ambulance very kindly agreed to teach the kids first aid and CPR. However I was a bit shocked that they were still teaching the 2 puffs and 30 pumps on the chest technique.

I thought this method stopped being taught years ago thanks to Vinnie .Jones and his 'staying alive' campaign with the British Heart Foundation? It certainly isn't how you are taught it in the NHS.

AIBU to think that such organisations should be teaching people, especially very young children, the correct, most up to date techniques or am I just being ungrateful?

I can't get my head around hands only. If there's no rescue breaths there's no oxygen to actually circulate? How does it work?

DD1 was born at 10.30 am. Her circulation did not make the switch from being inside me to being born (persistent hypertension of the new born), so her blood was not going through her lungs to collect any oxygen to circulate around her body.

She was gradually getting more and more poorly and getting bluer and bluer as the day went on, but she made it to gone 6 pm before being taken to SCBU and being put on a ventilator.

I was amazed but the Doctors told me that we do not lose all the oxygen with each run around the body our blood does, so yes, people can go for some time with just compressions.

When I was a student nurse (only did first two years of degree) they taught both! They explained this to us in a similar way to above.

Ideally yes 30:2 as expired air contains 16%o2 so as a rescue breath has some benefit. Also chest compressions performed correctly will enable a chest recoil drawing room air in with a full depth compression.

I'm a paramedic and many, many bystanders totally baulk at the idea of giving mouth to mouth, and in many situations rightly so. We don't do it, we have a BVM (bag valve mask) airway adjuncts and airways devices and intubation tubes as strings to our bows.

Good chest compressions only are better than nothing. Survival outcomes increase with chest compressions only.
You know you're doing good ones when you feel the first rib go...... (sorry, but it's true)

If you don't have a mask, you can use a plastic bag. Make a hole for the mouth. Not ideal, but better than nothing.

www.firstaid.co.uk/Resuscitation-Faceshield-in-Key-ring-Pouch-PRE103/?sku_s=A521&utm_source=Google&utm_medium=Google+Shopping&utm_campaign=firstaid.co.uk+google+shopping&gclid=Cj0KCQjwnPLKBRC-ARIsAL_JTCxN8ADr147vVri0u5EbwbPhyOIV5BbmLDWwp_zfOdAzsgYHGdZTp6QaAoWlEALw_wcB

Sorry for the long link, no idea how to shorten them but we all have these on our key rings in case it's needed. One use only but thankfully not had to use them yet.

I'm an independent first aid trainer.

HSE requirements are full resus if willing and able, if not then just compressions.

I teach both versions and explain when and why you might use each but the most important thing is that the person is comfortable with the preferred method.

There is also some basic biology around the breaths that first aiders should understand which aid the rest of resus so I believe they should all be shown how to do breaths at the very least.

I did my resus yesterday (nurse) and was taught 30:2. Unless no mask available in which case, continuous chest compressions until a mask is available.

Ok, to put another stance on it, how should young children be taught CPR (if at all)? I'm willing to accept that I'm wrong on the compressions only front, but is it a good idea for 7 year olds to be taught the 30:2 approach?

Why shouldn't they be taught it hairy? I don't understand what the problem would be.

Medic and most recent update was 30:2.

I expect the television commercials kept it as simple as possible in order to keep it direct, non-daunting and as useful as possible. Rescue breaths are something most people would feel uncomfortable with unless they felt they had sufficient training.

I do wish 16 year olds were made to do a decent and robust first aid course along with GCSEs.

They absolutely should be taught it! We can't shield them completely from risks and realities of life.

IME organisations will teach 30:2 (for adult CPR) to children saying that if they feel in any way uncomfortable they do not need to give the breaths. If they do have to do it it may we'll be to someone they know (sorry) and so they might be happy to do the breaths. Emphasise calling 999 and getting a defib. My 4 year old was taught cpr at a town fair - of course she would not be effective but it is about exposure to it. I had taught her already but mummy's teaching is less interesting than a stall at a fair apparently .

If they ring 999 without knowing cpr or if they forgot it they may well just get told to do compression only cpr as to try to explain it over the phone in a stressful situation often wastes time.

There is also a good Lifesaver app / DVD? for older children.

It sounds as if your DC was taught well.

Getting a defib if there is one nearby I mean.

To be fair the last people id want anywhere near me if I was ill or Dying would be the St. John ambulance a more over priced incompetent group you could ever meet.

If I'm dying please leave me be or get someone with a clue.

I'm all in favour of any child being taught cpr, but I personally feel the emphasis at the age of 7 (as dd is) should be on chest compressions rather than rescue breaths in order to keep it as simple as possible for them.

And (if I'm honest) sticking to chest compressions keeps it more likely that she would actually attempt to do CPR. Others have stated, as I have been taught, CPR is more likely to be performed by members of the public if they don't feel obliged to do the rescue breaths. I don't deny that rescue breaths are the ideal. But in all honestly would you do them with blood / vomit / salvia etc in your way?

How likely is it that a 7 year old would be willing to do rescue breaths? Is it not easier and simpler to teach them to call for help and do chest compressions?

I don't see what's wrong with teaching them how to do rescue breaths and telling them it's ok to just do chest compressions if they don't want to do the breaths.
The nightmare scenario-seven year old comes downstairs to find their parent unconscious, not breathing and without a pulse. Do you want that child to be able to try rescue breaths that give their parent a better chance of surviving until the ambulance (that they should call first) comes or not?

(Dispatcher here)
Teach them basics. How to ring 999 and give the address, stay on the phone and follow the instructions. To put pressure with a dry towel on a cut, to put burns under cool water, and chest compressions
If they can do that, they're doing better than a lot of adults!

Over the phone we advise compressions only (generally), but for own use are taught 30:2. I did chest only on a guy that had a cardiac arrest in front of me because he had blood and vomit and I wasn't happy to give breaths. He survived

Also if they ring 999 we will tell them exactly what to do in simple terms. Nothing wrong with teaching breaths and compressions, whatever sinks in best really

But in all honestly would you do them with blood / vomit / salvia etc in your way

It probably depends on who it was. Husband/family member, yes absolutely. Random in the street most likely not. I carry a mask thing in my handbag in case of emergency.

I had my refresher heart start course recently. 2 rescue breaths and 30 pumps is still the recommendation but also taught it's okay not to do the breaths if you feel uncomfortable with that.

There are occasions when rescue breaths are crucial, especially with young children, so i guess it is better to learn them than not to learn them.

Actually Maryz makes an essential point. If we teach this (to any age) it is so, so important that we teach that it may well not work. That seems cruel but, again, is a reality of life. The risk is that we teach this as something that will always work and then they feel guilty when it doesn't. However, if we get our teaching right, they can take some small comfort in knowing that they tried to save them (ringing 999 first is the absolute priority).

As said, this keeps the children as the priority.