Hansen Marco Bo, Lippert Freddy Knudsen, Rasmussen Lars Simon, Nielsen Anne Møller
Department of Anaesthesia, Centre of Head and Orthopaedics, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Emergency Medical Services, Copenhagen, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Resuscitation. 2014 Dec;85(12):1681-5. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.08.038. Epub 2014 Oct 2.
Valuable information can be retrieved from automated external defibrillators (AEDs) used in victims of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We describe our experience with systematic downloading of data from deployed AEDs. The primary aim was to compare the proportion of shockable rhythm from AEDs used by laypersons with the corresponding proportion recorded by the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) on arrival.
In a 20-month study, we collected data on OHCAs in the Capital Region of Denmark where an AED was deployed prior to arrival of EMS. The AEDs were brought to the emergency medical dispatch centre for data downloading and rhythm analysis. Patient data were retrieved from the medical records from the admitting hospital, whereas data on EMS rhythm analyses were obtained from the Danish Cardiac Arrest Register between 2001 and 2010.
A total of 121 AEDs were deployed, of which 91 cases were OHCAs with presumed cardiac origin. The prevalence of initial shockable rhythm was 55.0% (95% CI [44.7-64.8%]). This was significantly greater than the proportion recorded by the EMS (27.6%, 95% CI [27.0-28.3%], p<0.0001). Shockable arrests were significantly more likely to be witnessed (92% vs. 34%, p<0.0001) and the bystander CPR rate was higher (98% vs. 85%, p=0.04). More patients with initial shockable rhythm achieved return of spontaneous circulation upon hospital arrival (88% vs. 7%, p<0.0001) and had higher 30-day survival rate (72% vs. 5%, p<0.0001).
AEDs used by laypersons revealed a higher proportion of shockable rhythms compared to the EMS rhythm analyses.
从院外心脏骤停(OHCA)患者使用的自动体外除颤器(AED)中可以获取有价值的信息。我们描述了系统下载已部署AED数据的经验。主要目的是比较非专业人员使用的AED可电击心律的比例与紧急医疗服务(EMS)到达时记录的相应比例。
在一项为期20个月的研究中,我们收集了丹麦首都地区OHCA的数据,这些地区在EMS到达之前已部署了AED。将AED带到紧急医疗调度中心进行数据下载和心律分析。患者数据从收治医院的病历中获取,而EMS心律分析数据则从2001年至2010年的丹麦心脏骤停登记处获得。
共部署了121台AED,其中91例为推测心脏起源的OHCA。初始可电击心律的患病率为55.0%(95%CI[44.7-64.8%])。这显著高于EMS记录的比例(27.6%,95%CI[27.0-28.3%],p<0.0001)。可电击性心脏骤停更有可能被目击(92%对34%,p<0.0001),旁观者心肺复苏率更高(98%对85%,p=0.04)。更多初始可电击心律的患者在医院到达时实现了自主循环恢复(88%对7%,p<0.0001),并且30天生存率更高(72%对5%,p<0.0001)。
与EMS心律分析相比,非专业人员使用的AED显示出更高比例的可电击心律。