I wonder if the authors of the October 4th’s NEJM Journal Watch Alert saw the irony?
Firstly a review of a paper which examined the utility of the precordial thump for out of hospital cardiac events.
Nehme Z, Andrew E, Bernard SA, Smith K. Treatment of monitored out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation and pulseless ventricular tachycardia utilising the precordial thump. Resuscitation 2013 Aug 29
The author’s abstract (I’m too stingy to buy the complete paper) suggests that few studies have described the value of the precordial thump as first-line treatment of monitored out-of-hospital cardiac arrest from ventricular fibrillation and pulseless ventricular tachycardia.
Using data from the Victorian Ambulance Cardiac Arrest Registry out-of-hospital cardiac arres witnessed by paramedics between 2003 and 2011. The study outcomes were: impact of first shock/thump on return of spontaneous circulation and more importantly, survival to hospital discharge. 434 cases met the eligibility criteria. Seventeen patients (16.5%) observed a precordial thump induced rhythm…