Cardiac Arrest (CA) considerably claims quite a significant number of lives globally and thus causes an increasing worldwide concern. About 400,000 to 460,000 individuals in the US die every year as a result of CA before they arrive in the hospital or the emergency departments (Meaney et al., 2014, 417-420.). Initially, standard cardiac, pulmonary resuscitation (S-CRP) has been used. Although the mortality rate was not significantly improved with the use of S-CRP since only between 5-10% of the cases were successful. The Coronary Perfusion Pressure (CPP) reported was related closely to resuscitation that was successful however it served to be far much behind the patients with CA getting S-CRP that were normal. With the advent of Active compression-decompression Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ACDCRP) checklist, it has replaced the original S-CRP. It encompasses hand-held suction device applied to actively compress and decompress after every compression on the mid-sternum of the chest, and this has been noted to pose significant impacts on patients (Lighthall et al., 2012, 210).
According to recent studies in Embase, PubMed and China Biomedical Document Database from January 1990 to May 2012 have demonstrated that the ACD-CPR checklist significantly improved the outcome of cardiac arrest patients by increasing their survival rates as compared to not using the checklist at all (Hunziker et al., 2015, 1090). However, the healing ability of ACD-CRP notably are not consistent as such. The following terms were critical during the research, Cardiac arrest, active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation checklist and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (Bigham et al. 2011, 980)
Active compression-decompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ACDCRP) checklist has been useful in patients treatment suffering from cardiac arrest (CA) for quite some time. Nevertheless, the programme has not been posting outstanding results, although it has been known to increase the survival rates of most patients as compared to not using it entirely. The study concentrated on the importance of using the basic resuscitation checklist for cardiopulmonary resuscitation rather that not using it by increasing the rate of survival of patients (Kaye et al., 2014, 72). The procedure was written by a variety of individuals such as Xu-Rui, Hui-li Zhang, Geng-jin Chen among many other persons in the world medical journal of 2013.
According to my perceptions, the procedure is supported by the appropriate quality and amount of research evidence. This is evidently displayed by a large group of individual taking part in coming up with the procedure after several years of research. The research tends to be quite recent that is within a duration of the last few years. From clinical decisions, the research imperatively supports clinical decisions making, Since most of the patients exposed to the practice have posted significant results. Besides, the procedure covers all the important concept relevant to my process as listed in the situation section.
The method is appropriate to me since I am in a position to provide high-quality care to Cardiac arrest patients who are in need. Additionally, the procedure is neither sophisticated nor complicated, and it can be administered anywhere at any given time without any restrictions. Similarly, the outcome of the practice is instantaneous.
In summary, from the study, I understood that the ACD-CRP checklist is indeed relevant since it significantly improves the survival rate for patients on hospital discharge or to the survival rate of patients to hospital admission. Therefore, putting in practice the resuscitation checklist for Cardiopulmonary resuscitation increases the survival rate of patients as compared to not using the checklist for resuscitation entirely.
Bigham, B.L., Koprowicz, K., Rea, T., Dorian, P., Aufderheide, T.P., Davis, D.P., Powell, J., Morrison, L.J. and ROC Investigators, 2011. Cardiac arrest survival did not increase in the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium after implementation of the 2005 AHA CPR and ECC guidelines. Resuscitation, 82(8), pp.979-983.
Hunziker, S., Buhlmann, C., Tschan, F., Balestra, G., Leger, C., Schumacher, C., Semmer, N.K., Hunziker, P. and Marsch, S., 2015. Brief leadership instructions improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation in a high-fidelity simulation: a randomised controlled trial. Critical care medicine, 38(4), pp.1086-1091.
Kaye, W., Rallis, S.F., Mancini, M.E., Linhares, K.C., Angell, M.L., Donovan, D.S., Zajano, N.C. and Finger, J.A., 2014. The problem of poor retention of cardiopulmonary resuscitation skills may lie with the instructor, not the learner or the curriculum. Resuscitation, 21(1), pp.67-87.
Lighthall, G.K., Poon, T. and Harrison, T.K., 2012. Using in situ simulation to improve in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, 36(5), pp.209-216.
Meaney, P.A., Bobrow, B.J., Mancini, M.E., Christenson, J., De Caen, A.R., Bhanji, F., Abella, B.S., Kleinman, M.E., Edelson, D.P., Berg, R.A. and Aufderheide, T.P., 2014. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation quality: improving cardiac resuscitation outcomes both inside and outside the hospital. Circulation, 128(4), pp.417-435.
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SuperbGrade website, please click below to request its removal: