A viral video showing a doctor performing mouth-to-mouth resuscitation on a newborn has sparked debate among healthcare professionals. While many praised the act as life-saving, experts point out that this method is not recommended in neonatal resuscitation guidelines.
Standard protocols advise bag-and-mask ventilation for controlled and safe breathing support.
In this report, @Hbdoctor, (Neonatology), also explains why mouth-to-mouth ventilation is not guideline-based and may risk lung injury, infection, and improper ventilation.
This incident highlights the gap between public perception and evidence-based medical practice.
• Was this a justified emergency response or a risky deviation from protocol?
• What does this incident reveal about preparedness in primary care settings?
It is unfortunate there are still community healthcare centers in India that are not maintaining the standard healthcare services and don’t have the access to equipments. As healthcare professionals, we should do our part by spreading awareness about the right medical practices. It’s high time the officials make sure that community healthcare centers and government hospitals are provided with basic equipments needed.
In emergency situations people sometimes act based on instinct to save a life, but that’s exactly why proper training and protocols are important. What works once may not always be safe, especially in neonatal care where even small mistakes can have serious consequences. This really shows the gap between intention and evidence-based practice.
Yes, it was a justified emergency response by the doctor but the lack of application of safety protocols depicts a severe loophole in the healthcare facilities in health centers. These healthcare facilities are only displayed as advertisements but in reality, none of them exists in health centers.
Many of the primary health centers in India do not have basic equipment, leading healthcare professionals to sometimes ignore the protocol to save a life cause there is no other option.
Deviating from standard protocol is risky. Sometimes it might have been a situation call. We can’t be too quick to judge given the emergency of the situation.
In an emergency situation, I feel it is best to resort to the best option available instead of looking for higher measures. Not reviving the patient in any case, due to any reason based on the right/followed practices, is a bigger crime.
If lack of equipment led to this, it is deeply concerning. No doctor should have to choose the better of the two evils due to inadequate resources . It highlights the lack of equipments for basic emergencies in primary care centers!
Read the full article:
. It highlights the lack of equipments for basic emergencies in primary care centers!