The unresponsive non-breathing diver is either in a state of respiratory arrest or cardiorespiratory arrest, and the committee believes there is no reliable means of separating these states in water. Rescue breaths alone are unlikely to benefit a victim in full cardiorespiratory arrest, and effective chest compressions cannot be administered in the water. Therefore, any delay in removing the immersed victim to a stable platform allowing full CPR in order to deliver in-water rescue breaths is, in effect, a gamble on the possibility that they are in respiratory but not cardiac arrest.
As discussed above, the committee believes this gamble is worth taking at least in part because, in the absence of early paramedic-level advanced life support, a successful resuscitation from cardiac arrest is extremely unlikely, regardless of management. Nevertheless, there is a need for guidance on when to shift the priority from attempting rescue breaths to removing the victim from the water. The committee considered two key questions in this regard.
The first is whether there is any situation, other than concern about personal safety or an inability to deliver rescue breaths efficiently, in which a trained rescuer would not attempt in-water rescue breaths at all in favor of removing the victim from the water as quickly as possible.
One plausible circumstance might be when rescuer and victim surface immediately adjacent to suitable surface support such that there would be no delay at all initiating assisted retrieval. A relevant observation from actual incidents that have involved members of the committee is that removal of a fully equipped unresponsive scuba diver from the water is difficult and can take minutes. ...