Comparing the fully-automated external defibrillator and semi-automated external defibrillator used by laypersons: A simulation study
Journal of the Korean Society of Emergency Medicine
;
: 362-369, 2013.
Article
in Korean
| WPRIM
| ID: wpr-34422
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE:
This study compared the performance between the fully-automated external defibrillator (F-AED) and the semi-automated external defibrillator (S-AED) when used by laypersons.METHODS:
Thirty-three laypersons participated in a mannequin simulation study as part of Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) training courses. After 30 minutes of didactic education for the Automated External Defibrillator (AED), they watched a video on how to use the fully-automated external defibrillator (F-AED) and a semi-automated external defibrillator (S-AED) instead of a hands-on education. Laypersons performed the S-AED first, then the F-AED. Performances and shock delivery time intervals were recorded and evaluated.RESULTS:
The performances in shock delivery were better with the F-AED, although the overall performance was statistically insignificant. In terms of shock delivery interval, the F-AED was shorter than the S-AED (54.48+/-2.84 sec vs. 64.76+/-3.57 sec, respectively, p<0.01). In the post survey, F-AED had a higher preference (F-AED vs. S-AED 23(70%) vs. 5(15%), respectively, p<0.001).CONCLUSION:
The F-AED had a better performance and shorter shock delivery time interval than the S-AED. The F-AED should thus be considered for use, outside of the hospital, on cardiac arrest patients for early defibrillation.
Full text:
Available
Index:
WPRIM (Western Pacific)
Main subject:
Shock
/
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation
/
Defibrillators
/
Heart Arrest
/
Manikins
Limits:
Humans
Language:
Korean
Journal:
Journal of the Korean Society of Emergency Medicine
Year:
2013
Type:
Article
Similar
MEDLINE
...
LILACS
LIS