If proper CPR involves compressing the chest so much such that the ribcage might break - doesnt that breakage risks a bone puncturing the heart?

  • PP_GIRL_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    7 months ago

    Yes, more common however is a rib puncturing a lung. Regardless, the (slim) possibility of that happening is preferable to the certain death that would happen if you didn’t perform CPR

  • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Dark healthcare provider humor incoming: When considering these kinds of questions regarding CPR, we actually say, “Well, they ain’t getting any deader.”

    CPR actually reverses death. That’s why it only works sometimes and only if provided in a very short window of time after you’ve died. Nothing that is done during CPR is going to make that worse. So yeah, the reality is that it’s a little bit of a controlled free-for-all. It’s called “heroic measures” for a reason.

  • notapantsday@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    7 months ago

    While we’re on the topic of CPR, I want to address the myth that CPR “almost never works”. It’s great at what it does, which is pumping blood through the body enough to keep vital organs supplied with a bare minimum of oxygen so they can survive.

    However, there’s usually a reason why the heart has stopped beating and in most cases, CPR can’t reverse that reason. If the patient is in a car crash and has completely bled out, CPR won’t get any blood back into their system. Or if they’re at the end stage of a terminal disease, CPR can’t magically cure the disease.

    But in cases where the cause for the cardiac arrest is simple and easily reversed, chances of survival are much higher. For example, if someone is drowning and you get them out of the water within a few minutes of cardiac arrest, CPR is very effective, with the majority of patients surviving. Here’s a study with 113 patients who were resuscitated after drowning and only 8 were confirmed dead. For 20 patients, the outcome was unknown, but even if they all died as well, that’s still a 75% survival rate.

  • RaincoatsGeorge@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 months ago

    So I’ve done lots of cpr. First off it’s kind of a misconception that you’ll break ribs from cpr. You are more likely to break cartilage than actually break bones and appropriate cpr isn’t going to break bones unless they’re the smallest most frail person and the individual doing cpr is going crazy doing compressions.

    Even if you break ribs you’re probably not going to have a displaced rib fracture as there’s muscles and tissue holding those bones in place, it’s pretty rare to have ribs break so bad they risk puncturing organs and it usually involves catastrophic trauma, not what you get from cpr.

    • BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I have, thankfully, never done CPR live, but I’m certified to teach CPR by the Danish First Aid Council. So I have a interest in learning from actual practitioners, although I’m obviously not allowed to alter the course.

      Where do you stand on ventilation? Currently I have to teach 30:2 mouth to mouth, but I know that there’s talk about skipping ventilation either entirely or at least for adults. The thinking being that children don’t suffer spontaneous cardiac arrests, but that it’s usually a result of blocked airways.

      Do you do ventilation and does it make a difference in your experience?

      • Kelsenellenelvial@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’ve had a few different First Aid courses and the instructors all have slightly different reasoning. One argument for compression only is potential for passing disease mouth to mouth, the newer courses tend to teach this because sometimes people that don’t feel comfortable doing rescue breaths will fail to do CPR at all. Another is that in cases where you’ve witnessed the event, the blood is already fairly well oxygenated and if medical help has a good response time the benefits of breaths are minimal. The first is more about compression only CPR being better than nothing, breaths are still advised where the rescuer feels comfortable doing so. The second is pretty situational.

  • Norgur@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    7 months ago

    You need to always remember that the patient in such a situation is at the lowest possible point. You cannot make “dead” any worse. So “risks” don’t apply in that moment.

    Or, as a paramedic I knew said when someone asked him about the same question: “Whatever happens, it won’t kill him”

  • BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    The person is dead if you don’t do something. You cannot fuck their day up any worse than it already is.

    Don’t think about it, just act!

    • Make sure that you are safe. If no one else is taking charge, you are in charge!
    • Get emergency services on the phone.
    • Clear the airways.
    • Get going with 30:2 at 100-120 BPM.
    • Get some help from the people around you.
    • Send someone for an AED.
    • Send someone to meet the ambulance.

    You can think about it later.

  • notapantsday@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    I’ve never heard of a punctured heart personally, but I do think it’s possible. A punctured lung is much more common. But both conditions are usually treatable if the patient survives.

    CPR does carry some risks, but not doing CPR is guaranteed to be lethal. So any risk (to the patient) is worth taking at that point.