[supwiggles]

This +10. Out of the 11 out of hospital arrests that I went to as a Paramedic (in a 6 month period), only 1 of them survived.

Ironically, the one who survived was a prisoner who had cut his own throat. He had pretty much bled out by the time we got there, with a tiny little junctional on the monitor. Today he has 0 deficits, and it is like the event never occurred.

[thematt]

Maybe I'm missing something, but even if there's only a 10% chance of survival I'd still want somebody to give it a shot. What is the downside -- somebody has to do it for 30 minutes until the plane lands?

[JshWright]

That's 10% for someone who had access to advanced care within a few minutes.

If CPR goes on for more than 10 minutes or so in a non-hypothermic patient (with no other interventions), your chances of survival are basically nil. This is is especially true if you have a limited number of people doing compressions. Effective compressions are extremely hard work, and rescuer fatigue is a huge issue with CPR (we switch every two minutes no matter how 'fine' the person doing compressions claims to be). I doubt you could maintain effective CPR on an aircraft for 30 minutes (I suppose you could get a couple dozen people involved, but that seems unlikely).

If I'm not back in 15 minutes, please stop... At that point enough damage has been done to my brain that I don't want to come back...

[jlgreco]

Is CPR done on people with wounds like that? I would think the chest compressions would mostly just be pushing blood out, but I guess doing that is better than doing nothing?

[rdl]

The new protocol (at least for military, or at least serious trauma) is to treat massive bleeding above airway/breathing/circulation. I guess what you'd do is have someone applying pressure (or strap an israeli bandage around the neck, but not tightly in a way which would cut off circulation?) while someone else does CPR and then AED. The goal is to never have more than a 10sec break in chest compressions.