Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2010 Nov 6;376(9752):1552-7.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61454-7. Epub 2010 Oct 14.

Chest-compression-only versus standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a meta-analysis

Michael Hüpfl  1 , Harald F Selig, Peter Nagele
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Chest-compression-only versus standard cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a meta-analysis

Michael Hüpfl et al. Lancet. .

Abstract

Background: In out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, dispatcher-assisted chest-compression-only bystander CPR might be superior to standard bystander CPR (chest compression plus rescue ventilation), but trial findings have not shown significantly improved outcomes. We aimed to establish the association of chest-compression-only CPR with survival in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Methods: Medline and Embase were systematically reviewed for studies published between January, 1985, and August, 2010, in which chest-compression-only bystander CPR was compared with standard bystander CPR for adult patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. In the primary meta-analysis, we included trials in which patients were randomly allocated to receive one of the two CPR techniques, according to dispatcher instructions; and in the secondary meta-analysis, we included observational cohort studies of chest-compression-only CPR. All studies had to supply survival data. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. A fixed-effects model was used for both meta-analyses because of an absence of heterogeneity among the studies (I(2)=0%).

Findings: In the primary meta-analysis, pooled data from three randomised trials showed that chest-compression-only CPR was associated with improved chance of survival compared with standard CPR (14% [211/1500] vs 12% [178/1531]; risk ratio 1·22, 95% CI 1·01-1·46). The absolute increase in survival was 2·4% (95% CI 0·1-4·9), and the number needed to treat was 41 (95% CI 20-1250). In the secondary meta-analysis of seven observational cohort studies, no difference was recorded between the two CPR techniques (8% [223/2731] vs 8% [863/11 152]; risk ratio 0·96, 95% CI 0·83-1·11).

Interpretation: For adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, instructions to bystanders from emergency medical services dispatch should focus on chest-compression-only CPR.

Funding: US National Institutes of Health and American Heart Association.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest

PN is receiving research support from Roche Diagnostics, unrelated to this study. MH is receiving salary from St. John’s Ambulance Service, Vienna, Austria and received research support, lecture fees and travel support from Novo Nordisk. HFS does not report a conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study Selection Process for Studies Included in Meta-Analysis (based on PRISMA guidelines).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Primary Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials in Chest Compression-Only CPR
Figure 3
Figure 3
Secondary Analysis of Observational Cohort Studies in Chest Compression-Only CPR
Figure 4
Figure 4
Return of Spontaneous Circulation in Chest Compression-Only CPR
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Koster RW. Mouth-to-mouth ventilation and/or chest compression in basic life support: The debate continues. Resuscitation. 2008;77(3):283–5. - PubMed
    1. Nolan J. Push, blow or both: Is there a role for compression-only CPR? Anaesthesia. 2010;65(8):771–4. - PubMed
    1. 2005 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation. 2005 Dec 13;112(24 Suppl):IV1–203. - PubMed
    1. Handley AJ, Koster R, Monsieurs K, Perkins GD, Davies S, Bossaert L. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2005: Section 2. Adult basic life support and use of automated external defibrillators. Resuscitation. 2005 Dec;67(Supplement 1):S7–S23. - PubMed
    1. Ewy GA, Zuercher M, Hilwig RW, Sanders AB, Berg RA, Otto CW, et al. Improved neurological outcome with continuous chest compressions compared with 30:2 compressions-to-ventilations cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a realistic swine model of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Circulation. 2007;116(22):2525–30. - PubMed

Publication types