COVID-19 and resuscitation: La tournée of traditional Chinese medicine?

BACKGROUND: As it has been established in previous publications of the author, the current extra-hospital statistics referring to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) are far from being minimally satisfactory (14%-17% success). Since the appearance of acquired immune deficiency syndrome, its application has been increasingly undermined as other subsequent pandemics (H1N1, Ebola, coronavirus disease 2019) seriously infringing lay rescuers intervention during classical CPR steps (mouth-to-mouth ventilation), forcing to modify vital support protocols. Both KI-1 Yong quan and PC-9 Zhong chong alternative rescue maneuvers could come to aid those victims of impending death situation due to both cardiac arrest or stroke, upgrading current survival rates of said unfortunate patients. AIM: To validate a complementary resuscitation maneuver originated in Chinese Medicine knowledge, carefully integrated into international CPR protocols [World Journal of Critical Care Medicine (WJCCM), August 2013]. METHODS: The model to verify its statistical validity of quoted research was the Retrospective Cohort Study, which redeems the “semiotic paradigm” that gave rise to medical semiotics. Its value strives in the differential detail if the deceased patients are considered the control group instead of the patients that may be deceased. Thus, combining the semiotic paradigm with the Retrospective Cohort Study allows us to manage the collateral potential lethal effects of the random process in cases of extreme emergencies. RESULTS: The statistic results provided by the methodological analysis of this work were previously published in WJCCM August 2013, ISSN 2220-3141). In a total of 89 patients in which the Yong quan maneuver was tested, 75 survived and 14 died. In order to compare this data with the percentages of survivors in the other maneuvers, we stipulate the assumption that if 89 patients are the 100% of the sample, how many patients would survive if the survival rate is 6.4% in CPR, 30% in defibrillation and 48% in CPR + defibrillation. By this way we obtained the approximate values of patients that would survive when applying these classical resuscitation maneuvers. Then we obtained the format of the tables to perform the exact Fisher test with the help of a statistical processor; the consequent result in a valuation of P < 0.0001 was considered "extremely statistically significant". CONCLUSION: The author herein provides a methodological–statistical analysis of such contribution which does not imply any cost at all and could even help prevent the withdrawal of classical CPR practices.