ArticleResuscitation plus2024
Time difference between pad placement in single versus double external defibrillation: A live patient simulation model.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing Patient Safety in Refractory Ventricular Fibrillation: A Systematic Review of Double Sequential and Vector Change Defibrillation Barriers.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Factors for good neurological outcome in adult OHCA with initial shockable rhythm: a retrospective multicenter cohort study from the German Resuscitation Registry.Resuscitation plus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) cause significant patient morbidity and mortality. Double sequential external defibrillation (DSED) represents an alternative treatment for OHCA patients, but the use is currently reserved for patients in refractory ventricular fibrillation. However, OHCA patients may achieve return of spontaneous circulation earlier with the use of DSED as initial treatment. This study compares the necessary times needed to establish pad placement in DSED compared to normal pad placement in a live patient simulation model. Methods: This study was an observational cohort study with ambulance personnel and live patient models. The procedure was performed on two patient categories, with BMI 20.9 (patient A) and BMI 32.8 (patient B). Two-member teams established two defibrillators ready for rhythm analysis. Time spent for standard and DSED procedure was registered in the same procedure. All team members performed the procedure on both patient categories. Results: In total, 108 procedures were performed on both patient categories. Mean time to standard pad placement was 24.6 ± 3.3 s for patient A, and 27.4 ± 3.7 s for patients B. Mean time to DSED pad placement was 38.3 ± 7.0 s for patient A, and 41.3 ± 7.4 s for patient B. Mean difference in time needed for DSED versus standard pad placement was 13.7 ± 4.8 s for patient A, and 13.9 ± 4.6 s for patient B. There was no significant difference in time spent between the two patient categories ( Conclusion: The necessary time to establish DSED versus standard defibrillation pad placement was short. This may support clinical studies on DSED as initial treatment for OHCA patients without risk of significant increase in time to first defibrillation.
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.