1stCpr

24/10/2025

24/10/2025

Lots of discussion about the 2025 American Heart Association guidleines that were just released.

Much, much discussion about mechanical CPR.

But if you look at the verbiage, in SAR, little has changed. There is no difference in outcomes between manual chest compressions and mechanical CPR.

Mechanical CPR shines when it is used in setting such as this:

-limited responders . A case where 2 responders are running an arrest, mechanical CPR is a massive benefit. Rescuers would otherwise become quickly exhausted.

-cases where transport is in the best interests of the patient. In transport, manual chest compressions are ineffective, and mechanical CPR shines in this scenario. Severe accidental hypothermic cardiac arrest and refractory vf/pulseless vt are cases that can benefit from transport.

-rescuer safety. Too many times I have seen ski patrollers straddling a moving toboggan to provide chest compressions and ventilation. This is not a safe act. ZOLL EMS and Fire Autopulse makes this safe. Same with stretcher carries, rope rescues etc….but only when CPR is safe and appropriate .

-technical rescue. I have long lined a number of cardiac arrests. Autopulse assisted long line arrests were the only ones that received adequate compressions.

23/10/2025

Need a summary of the 2025 AHA Guidelines for CPR and ECC? Check out the 2025 Highlights, available in 19 languages: https://cpr.heart.org/en/resuscitation-science/guidelines-updates-and-highlights

23/10/2025

Giveaway below 🙂

2015 – AHA – There’s no science showing that mechanical CPR is better than regular CPR. Soooo, go ahead and use it if you want in situations where CPR is logistically difficulty or unsafe. Over the next 10 years, people should research this a bit more.

2020 – AHA - We got nothing to say. Lots of research still occurring all over the world

2025 – AHA – Okay, the studies are in. They tell us……nothing. Soooo, go ahead and use it if you want in situations where CPR is logistically difficult or unsafe but we simply don’t have the evidence to categorically tell you that you SHOULD use it all the time.

2025 – EMS on the internet – OH MY GOD!!! AHA put the fork in mechanical CPR! AHA sucks! Someone is getting a $@ #$$@ kickback!

Ahhhh, good people, nothing has changed. Several large, randomized control trials were completed over the past 10 years and simply showed no benefit one way or the other. Use the Lucas or Autopulse all you want and the researchers will continue to track the data.

Also, the treatment recommendations do not even come from AHA – they come from ILCOR. AHA simply regurgitates the ILCOR treatment recommendations into a somewhat more palatable package in the form of guidelines. All of the above items are linked in the comments. I will mail you a free patch to the first person who tells me who the bystander is...

Update - Okay good people…..I apologize in advance for the embarrassment……

The bystander is Corey Haim…..the original…….Lucas 🤓

23/10/2025

Here you go
2025 Resuscitation guidelines brewed in SA and in accordance with ILCOR and AHA guidelines.

Here is the2025 algorithm

23/10/2025

22/10/2025

2025 guidelines are out!

Here is our take on them.

Get them now on our website here: https://www.resus.co.za/?p=17838

Soon to be featured on social media and EMGuidance

20/10/2025

20/10/2025

20/10/2025