Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34223311›Full record

ArticleResuscitation plus2020

"Drones are a great idea! What is an AED?" novel insights from a qualitative study on public perception of using drones to deliver automatic external defibrillators.

K Sedig, M B Seaton, I R Drennan, S Cheskes, K N Dainty

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Resuscitation plus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Unmanned aerial vehicles and pre-hospital emergency medicine.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

K SedigNorth York General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
M B SeatonNorth York General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
I R DrennanSunnybrook Centre for Prehospital Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
S CheskesSunnybrook Centre for Prehospital Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
K N DaintyNorth York General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
North York General Hospital · CAHealth Sciences Centre · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe quickest way to ensure survival in an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is for a bystander to provide immediate cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and apply an automated external defibrillator (AED). The urgency of OHCA treatment has led to the proposal of alternative avenues for better access to AEDs, particularly in rural settings. More recently, using unmanned aerial vehicles (or drones) to deliver AEDs to rural OHCA sites has proven promising in improving survival rates.

objectiveA pilot drone AED delivery program is currently being piloted in the community of Caledon, Ontario. The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of public perception and acceptance of the use of drones for this purpose and to identify tailored community engagement strategies to ensure successful uptake.

methodsIn-depth qualitative descriptive study using interviews and focus group data collection and inductive thematic analysis. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 67 community members (40 interviews; 2 focus groups of 15) at existing community events in the project area. Interview guides were used to ensure consistency across data collection events. Detailed field notes were recorded when audio-recording was not possible.

resultsThe central message seen throughout the data was quickly identified as the potential impact of low levels of CPR and AED literacy in the community over anything else including concerns about the drone. The impact of the community's existing relationship with the EMS; the need for bystander CPR & AED promotion prior to the program launch; and the value the community places on transparency and accountability related to the research and the drones were also key findings. In general, the drone concept was found to be acceptable but concerns about providing CPR and using the AED was what created anxieties in the lay public that we underestimated.

conclusionDrone-delivered AEDs may be feasible and effective but successful uptake in smaller communities will require a deep understanding of a community's cardiac arrest literacy levels, information needs and readiness for innovation. This work will inform a robust community engagement plan that will be scalable to other locations considering a drone AED program.

Indexed as

Automated external defibrillationCardiopulmonary resuscitationDronesEmergency medical servicesOut-of-hospital cardiac arrestPublic perceptionQualitative

Identifiers

PMID34223311
PMCPMC8244296
OpenAlexW3093338442

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.