The days of mouth-to-mouth contact may be over – when it comes to CPR, that is.

New research released last week by the American Heart Association indicates that hands-only CPR may be just as effective as the traditional method of chest compressions and mouth-to-mouth breaths.

Traditionally, CPR has been taught using a combination of two quick breaths for every 30 chest compressions for adults.

This combination, updated by the American Heart Association in 2005, was a change from the previous combination for adults – 15 compressions to every two breaths – and represents an attempt to emphasize the greater importance of chest compressions.

With factors such as fear of disease transmission, the complicated nature of administering breaths and people’s discomfort with mouth-to-mouth contact, hopes are that people will be more willing to assist in emergencies by applying the new method.

Frank Schabel, assistant professor of kinesiology, said there are several factors which inhibit some bystanders from helping individuals in need of CPR.

“The main things are that people do not know how to administer CPR, they are not confident and they are afraid of disease transmission with mouth-to-mouth,” Schabel said.

With the new hands-only method, bystanders who witness someone going into cardiac arrest are advised to perform chest compressions at a rate of 100 per minute and continue until trained medical personnel arrive to take over.

“There is value in mouth-to-mouth if you are well-trained, but many people who are not just end up being bystanders,” Schabel said.

Hands-only CPR is not, however, recommended for children or infants because they usually need CPR for different reasons than adults.

Children and infants who collapse do so primarily because of breathing-related issues, whereas adults are more likely to be experiencing heart-related complications.

Additionally, the American Heart Association hopes bystanders witnessing a collapse will be more likely to administer CPR if they know mouth-to-mouth contact is not required.

Marne Parriott, senior in food science, said she would help a person whether mouth-to-mouth contact was needed or not.

“I don’t think I would be any more likely to help because I would have helped anyway,” Parriott said. “I have been a certified lifeguard for a long time, so I think I would have done it anyway.”

Others like Kayla Schneider, freshman in elementary education, feels better about the new technique, especially since she has no extensive training.

“I would [feel better],” Schneider said. “It would probably be safer for me and the other person.”

Schabel recommends that students take the Health Studies 105 course if they are interested in becoming certified in CPR and first aid and becoming more comfortable with emergencies.