Drone delivery of an automated external defibrillator – a mixed method simulation study of bystander experience

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) affects some 275,000 individuals in Europe each year. Time from collapse to defibrillation is essential for survival. As emergency medical services (EMS) response times in Sweden have increased, novel methods are needed to facilitate early treatment. Unmanned aerial vehicles (i.e. drones) have potential to deliver automated external defibrillators (AED). The aim of this simulation study was to explore bystanders’ experience of a simulated OHCA-situation where a drone delivers an AED and how the situation is affected by having one or two bystanders onsite.

Methods

This explorative simulation study used a mixed methodology describing bystanders’ experiences of retrieving an AED delivered by a drone in simulated OHCA situations. Totally eight participants were divided in two groups of bystanders a) alone or b) in pairs and performed CPR on a manikin for 5 minutes after which an AED was delivered by a drone at 50 m from the location. Qualitative data from observations, interviews of participants and video recordings were analysed using content analysis alongside descriptive data on time delays during bystander interaction.

Results

Three categories of bystander experiences emerged: 1) technique and preparedness, 2) support through conversation with the dispatcher, and 3) aid and decision-making. The main finding was that retrieval of an AED as delivered by a drone was experienced as safe and feasible for bystanders. None of the participants hesitated to retrieve the AED; instead they experienced it positive, helpful and felt relief upon AED-drone arrival and were able to retrieve and attach the AED to a manikin. Interacting with the AED-drone was perceived as less difficult than performing CPR or handling their own mobile phone during T-CPR. Single bystander simulation introduced a significant hands-off interval when retrieving the AED, a period lasting 94 s (range 75 s–110 s) with one participant compared to 0 s with two participants.

Conclusion

The study shows that it made good sense for bystanders to interact with a drone in this simulated suspected OHCA. Bystanders experienced delivery of AED as safe and feasible. This has potential implications, and further studies on bystanders’ experiences in real cases of OHCA in which a drone delivers an AED are therefore necessary.

Related collections

Most cited references 19

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Public-access defibrillation and survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Simon Travers, A Hallström, M McBurnie … (2004)

The rate of survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is low. It is not known whether this rate will increase if laypersons are trained to attempt defibrillation with the use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs). We conducted a prospective, community-based, multicenter clinical trial in which we randomly assigned community units (e.g., shopping malls and apartment complexes) to a structured and monitored emergency-response system involving lay volunteers trained in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) alone or in CPR and the use of AEDs. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. More than 19,000 volunteer responders from 993 community units in 24 North American regions participated. The two study groups had similar unit and volunteer characteristics. Patients with treated out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the two groups were similar in age (mean, 69.8 years), proportion of men (67 percent), rate of cardiac arrest in a public location (70 percent), and rate of witnessed cardiac arrest (72 percent). No inappropriate shocks were delivered. There were more survivors to hospital discharge in the units assigned to have volunteers trained in CPR plus the use of AEDs (30 survivors among 128 arrests) than there were in the units assigned to have volunteers trained only in CPR (15 among 107; P=0.03; relative risk, 2.0; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.07 to 3.77); there were only 2 survivors in residential complexes. Functional status at hospital discharge did not differ between the two groups. Training and equipping volunteers to attempt early defibrillation within a structured response system can increase the number of survivors to hospital discharge after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in public locations. Trained laypersons can use AEDs safely and effectively. Copyright 2004 Massachusetts Medical Society

0 comments Cited 169 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Outcomes of rapid defibrillation by security officers after cardiac arrest in casinos.

B. L. Clark, Erin Roe, G Nichol … (2000)

The use of automated external defibrillators by persons other than paramedics and emergency medical technicians is advocated by the American Heart Association and other organizations. However, there are few data on the outcomes when the devices are used by nonmedical personnel for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. We studied a prospective series of cases of sudden cardiac arrest in casinos. Casino security officers were instructed in the use of automated external defibrillators. The locations where the defibrillators were stored in the casinos were chosen to make possible a target interval of three minutes or less from collapse to the first defibrillation. Our protocol called for a defibrillation first (if feasible), followed by manual cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The primary outcome was survival to discharge from the hospital. Automated external defibrillators were used, 105 patients whose initial cardiac rhythm was ventricular fibrillation. Fifty-six of the patients 153 percent) survived to discharge from the hospital. Among the 90 patients whose collapse was witnessed (86 percent), the clinically relevant time intervals were a mean (+/-SD) of 3.5+/-2.9 minutes from collapse to attachment of the defibrillator, 4.4+/-2.9 minutes from collapse to the delivery of the first defibrillation shock, and 9.8+/-4.3 minutes from collapse to The arrival of the paramedics. The survival rate was 74 percent for those who received their first defibrillation no later than three minutes after a witnessed collapse and 49 percent for those who received their first defibrillation after more than three minutes. Rapid defibrillation by nonmedical personnel using an automated external defibrillator can improve survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation. Intervals of no more than three minutes from collapse to defibrillation are necessary to achieve the highest survival rates.

0 comments Cited 165 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Public use of automated external defibrillators.

Sherry Caffrey, Paula J. Willoughby, Paul Pepe … (2002)

Automated external defibrillators save lives when they are used by designated personnel in certain public settings. We performed a two-year prospective study at three Chicago airports to assess whether random bystanders witnessing out-of-hospital cardiac arrests would retrieve and successfully use automated external defibrillators. Defibrillators were installed a brisk 60-to-90-second walk apart throughout passenger terminals at O'Hare, Midway, and Meigs Field airports, which together serve more than 100 million passengers per year. The use of defibrillators was promoted by public-service videos in waiting areas, pamphlets, and reports in the media. We assessed the time from notification of the dispatchers to defibrillation, survival rate at 72 hours and at one year among persons with cardiac arrest, their neurologic status, and the characteristics of rescuers. Over a two-year period, 21 persons had nontraumatic cardiac arrest, 18 of whom had ventricular fibrillation. With two exceptions, defibrillator operators were good Samaritans, acting voluntarily. In the case of four patients with ventricular fibrillation, defibrillators were neither nearby nor used within five minutes, and none of these patients survived. Three others remained in fibrillation and eventually died, despite the rapid use of a defibrillator (within five minutes). Eleven patients with ventricular fibrillation were successfully resuscitated, including eight who regained consciousness before hospital admission. No shock was delivered in four cases of suspected cardiac arrest, and the device correctly indicated that the problem was not due to ventricular fibrillation. The rescuers of 6 of the 11 successfully resuscitated patients had no training or experience in the use of automated defibrillators, although 3 had medical degrees. Ten of the 18 patients with ventricular fibrillation were alive and neurologically intact at one year. Automated external defibrillators deployed in readily accessible, well-marked public areas in Chicago airports were used effectively to assist patients with cardiac arrest. In the cases of survivors, most of the users had no duty to act and no prior training in the use of these devices. Copyright 2002 Massachusetts Medical Society

0 comments Cited 102 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

A. Claesson:

ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0499-9929

+46-70-4940546 , andreas.claesson@ki.se

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med

Title: Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine

Publisher: BioMed Central (London )

ISSN (Electronic): 1757-7241

Publication date (Electronic): 8 April 2019

Publication date PMC-release: 8 April 2019

Publication date Collection: 2019

Volume: 27

Electronic Location Identifier: 40

Affiliations

[1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0626, GRID grid.4714.6, Department of Medicine, Centre for Resuscitation Science, , Karolinska Institute, ; SE-17177 Stockholm, Sweden

[2 ]Västerbotten Emergency Medical Services, SE-90737 Umeå, Sweden

[3 ]ISNI 0000 0000 9477 7523, GRID grid.412442.5, Centre for Prehospital Research, Faculty of Caring Science, Work Life and Social Welfare, , University of Borås, ; SE-, 501 90 Borås, Sweden

Author information

A. Claesson http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0499-9929

Article

Publisher ID: 622

DOI: 10.1186/s13049-019-0622-6

PMC ID: 6454735

PubMed ID: 30961651

SO-VID: b8631a69-745e-4853-b939-355fc0bbf963

License:

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.