First Aid for Pool Chemical Exposure: A Narrative Review.

Over 4500 visits to emergency departments related to pool chemical exposures occur annually in the United States, and it is likely that many more go unreported. Injury can occur due to sensitivity to standard chemical concentrations in pools (such as with opening one's eyes underwater), accidental exposure to super-concentrated chemicals (such as malfunction of a pool chlorinator), or accidental inhalation of fumes while opening the storage container for chlorination tablets. Therefore, first aid care has the potential to significantly limit morbidity.  A literature review was undertaken to determine the appropriate first aid for pool chemical exposures. This literature search revealed 25 pertinent articles, of which none were systematic reviews or studies directly related to the first aid treatment of pool chemical exposures. However, five articles were included as indirect evidence, and a hand search of references revealed five additional articles for inclusion. Treatment recommendations were extrapolated from the treatment of chemical exposures from other incidents. Symptoms of pool chemical exposure reflect irritation secondary to the caustic chemicals involved. Patients may report irritation of the skin, eyes, nose, or throat; cough; chest tightness; and difficulty breathing. Following any exposure to pool chemicals, the victim should be removed from the source, taken to an area with fresh air, and contaminated materials (e.g. clothing, contact lenses) should be removed. Irrigation of the exposed area should take place immediately with uncontaminated fresh water for at least 15 minutes. It is anticipated that an exposed person will be symptomatically improved by leaving the area of exposure, removing their contaminated clothing items, and irrigating the contaminated body parts. However, if symptoms do not resolve during that time or if symptoms are worsening, the victim should be evaluated by trained medical personnel.

Outcome of Conventional Bystander Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Cardiac Arrest Following Drowning.

INTRODUCTION: The concept of compressions only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CO-CPR) evolved from a perception that lay rescuers may be less likely to perform mouth-to-mouth ventilations during an emergency. This study hopes to describe the efficacy of bystander compressions and ventilations cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CV-CPR) in cardiac arrest following drowning. HYPOTHESIS/PROBLEM: The aim of this investigation is to test the hypothesis that bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) utilizing compressions and ventilations results in improved survival for cases of cardiac arrest following drowning compared to CPR involving compressions only. METHODS: The Cardiac Arrest Registry for Enhanced Survival (CARES) was queried for patients who suffered cardiac arrest following drowning from January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2017, and in whom data were available on type of bystander CPR delivered (ie, CV-CPR CO-CPR). The primary outcome of interest was neurologically favorable survival, as defined by cerebral performance category (CPC). RESULTS: Neurologically favorable survival was statistically significantly associated with CV-CPR in pediatric patients aged five to 15 years (aOR = 2.68; 95% CI, 1.10-6.77; P = .03), as well as all age group survival to hospital discharge (aOR = 1.54; 95% CI, 1.01-2.36; P = .046). There was a trend with CV-CPR toward neurologically favorable survival in all age groups (aOR = 1.35; 95% CI, 0.86-2.10; P = .19) and all age group survival to hospital admission (aOR = 1.29; 95% CI, 0.91-1.84; P = .157). CONCLUSION: In cases of cardiac arrest following drowning, bystander CV-CPR was statistically significantly associated with neurologically favorable survival in children aged five to 15 years and survival to hospital discharge.

Bystander CPR is associated with improved neurologically favourable survival in cardiac arrest following drowning.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac arrest associated with drowning is a major public health concern with limited research available on outcome. This investigation aims to define the population at risk, and identify factors associated with neurologically favourable survival. METHODS: The Cardiac Arrest Registry for Enhanced Survival (CARES) database was queried for patients who had suffered cardiac arrest following drowning between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2015. The primary outcomes of interest were for favourable or unfavourable neurological outcome at hospital discharge, as defined by Cerebral Performance Category (CPC). RESULTS: A total of 919 drowning patients were identified. Neurological outcome data was available in 908 patients. Neurologically favourable survival was significantly associated with bystander CPR (Odds Ratio (OR)=2.94; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.86-4.64; p<0.001), witnessed drowning (OR=2.6; 95% CI 1.69-4.01; p<0.001) and younger age (OR=0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.98; p<0.001). Public location of drowning (OR=1.17; 95% CI 0.77-1.79; p=0.47), male gender (OR=0.9, 95% CI 0.57-1.43; p=0.66), and shockable rhythm (OR=1.54; 95% CI 0.76-3.12; p=0.23), were not associated with favourable neurological survival. AED application prior to EMS was associated with a decreased likelihood of favourable neurological outcome (OR=0.38; 95% CI 0.28-0.66; p<0.001). In multivariate analysis, bystander CPR (adjusted OR 3.02, 95% CI 1.85-4.92, p<0.001), witnessed drowning (adjusted OR 3.27, 95% CI 2.0-5.36, p<0.001) and younger age (adjusted OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.98, p<0.001) remained associated with neurologically favourable survival. CONCLUSIONS: Neurologically favourable survival after drowning remains low but is improved by bystander CPR. Shockable rhythms were uncommon and not associated with improved outcomes.