ArticleScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2015
Quality of basic life support when using different commercially available public access defibrillators.
Article in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dispatcher-assisted AED use in single-rescuer cardiac arrest: study protocol for a randomized simulation study comparing standard and optimized dispatcher-assisted CPR instructions.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- The impact on users of an unfamiliar AED following a recent training experience: A randomized cross over simulation study.Resuscitation plus · 2024Article
- An effort to reduce chest compression pauses during automated external defibrillator use among laypeople: A randomized partially blinded controlled trial.Resuscitation plus · 2023Article
- Differences in Automated External Defibrillator Types in Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Treated by Police First Responders.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Article
- [AED drones on the rise? : Use of drones to improve public access defibrillation].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2022Review
- [Effects of automated external defibrillators on hands-off intervals in lay rescuers].Notfall & rettungsmedizin · 2022Article
- Effects of an Automated External Defibrillator With Additional Video Instructions on the Quality of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Effective deployment of public-access automated external defibrillators to improve out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes.Journal of general and family medicine · 2017Review
- [Worldwide experience with automated external defibrillators: What have we achieved? What else can we expect?].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2016Review
- Monitoring of in-hospital cardiac arrest events with the focus on Automated External Defibrillators--a retrospective observational study.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2015Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBasic life support (BLS) guidelines focus on chest compressions with a minimal no-flow fraction (NFF), early defibrillation, and a short perishock pause. By using an automated external defibrillator (AED) lay persons are guided through the process of attaching electrodes and initiating defibrillation. It is unclear, however, to what extent the voice instructions given by the AED might influence the quality of initial resuscitation.
methodsUsing a patient simulator, 8 different commercially available AEDs were evaluated within two different BLS scenarios (ventricular fibrillation vs. asystole). A BLS certified instructor acted according to the current European Resuscitation Council 2010 Guidelines and followed all of the AED voice prompts. In a second set of scenarios, the rescuer anticipated the appropriate actions and started already before the AED stopped speaking. A BLS scenario without AED served as the control. All scenarios were run three times.
resultsThe time until the first chest compression was 25 ± 2 seconds without the AED and ranged from 50 ± 3 to 148 ± 13 seconds with the AED depending on the model used. The NFF was .26 ± .01 without the AED and between .37 ± .01 and .72 ± .01 when an AED was used. The perishock pause ranged from 12 ± 0 to 46 ± 0 seconds. The optimized sequence of actions reduced the NFF, which ranged now from .32 ± .01 to .41 ± .01, and the perishock pause ranging from 1 ± 1 to 19 ± 1 seconds.
conclusionsVoice prompts given by commercially available AED merely meet the requirements of current evidence in basic life support. Furthermore, there is a significant difference between devices with regard to time until the first chest compression, perishock pause, no-flow fraction and other objective measures of the quality of BLS. However, the BLS quality may be improved with optimized handling of the AED. Thus, rescuers should be trained on the respective AED devices, and manufacturers should expend more effort in improving user guidance to shorten the NFF and perishock pause.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.