Harvard Health Content API

“Hands-only” CPR saves more lives than the traditional kind that includes mouth-to-mouth breathing, a new study finds. In 2008, the American Heart Association said that people giving CPR should stick with doing firm, rapid pushes on the chest. It said “rescue breaths” were not necessary. The hope was that this would get more people to do CPR. Early research also showed it was effective. The new study included 1,300 people who had a cardiac arrest outside of a hospital. In each case, someone saw the person collapse. Bystanders gave shocks from an automated defibrillator and also did CPR. Of those who got hands-only CPR, 46% were alive a month after their cardiac arrest. About 40% of those who got traditional CPR with rescue breaths were alive. More people kept good brain function with hands-only CPR — about 40%, compared with 33% of those who got rescue breaths.