Drennan Ian R, Seidler Dustin, Cheskes Sheldon
Sunnybrook Research Institute, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Resusc Plus. 2022 Sep 6;11:100287. doi: 10.1016/j.resplu.2022.100287. eCollection 2022 Sep.
Double Sequential External Defibrillation (DSED) is a proposed treatment strategy for patients in refractory VF (RVF) during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Defibrillator damage employing DSED is a theoretical concern expressed by defibrillator manufacturers yet the incidence of damage during resuscitation remains unknown.
We sought to explore the incidence of defibrillator damage employing DSED for RVF during OHCA.
We conducted a survey of EMS agencies, authors of previous publications, EMS medical directors, base hospital medical oversight groups, and defibrillator manufacturers to assess the incidence of defibrillator damage during DSED. Our survey focused on the frequency of DSED use, number of shocks used during DSED, technique used to employ DSED (simultaneous or sequential), and the incidence of defibrillator damage during DSED. We specifically targeted groups that were known to be using DSED in clinical practice.
Our survey response rate was 50% (65/129): 61% (34/56) EMS medical directors, 60% (6/10) authors, 100% (8/8) base hospitals, 33% (1/3) defibrillator manufacturers, 31% (16/52) paramedic services. In our case-based analysis the overall incidence of defibrillator damage was 0.4%. The incidence of defibrillator damage based on total number of DSED shocks was estimated between 0.11% and 0.22%. All reported cases of defibrillator damage occurred using a simultaneous defibrillation technique.
When DSED is employed using either a sequential or simultaneous technique the rate of defibrillator damage appears to be exceedingly low. Further high-quality evidence is required to determine the impact of DSED on patient centered outcomes, but the incidence of defibrillator damage should not limit it use. Defibrillator damage should continue to be monitored in future trials and clinical practice.
双序贯体外除颤(DSED)是一种针对院外心脏骤停(OHCA)期间难治性室颤(RVF)患者提出的治疗策略。使用DSED导致除颤器损坏是除颤器制造商提出的一个理论问题,但复苏期间损坏的发生率仍然未知。
我们试图探讨在OHCA期间对RVF使用DSED时除颤器损坏的发生率。
我们对急救医疗服务(EMS)机构、既往出版物的作者、EMS医疗主任、基地医院医疗监督小组和除颤器制造商进行了一项调查,以评估DSED期间除颤器损坏的发生率。我们的调查重点是DSED的使用频率、DSED期间使用的电击次数、采用DSED的技术(同步或序贯)以及DSED期间除颤器损坏的发生率。我们专门针对已知在临床实践中使用DSED的群体。
我们的调查回复率为50%(65/129):61%(34/56)的EMS医疗主任、60%(6/10)的作者、100%(8/8)的基地医院、33%(1/3)的除颤器制造商、31%(16/52)的护理人员服务机构。在我们基于病例的分析中,除颤器损坏的总体发生率为0.4%。根据DSED电击总数估计的除颤器损坏发生率在0.11%至0.22%之间。所有报告的除颤器损坏病例均使用同步除颤技术发生。
当采用序贯或同步技术使用DSED时,除颤器损坏率似乎极低。需要进一步的高质量证据来确定DSED对以患者为中心的结局的影响,但除颤器损坏的发生率不应限制其使用。在未来的试验和临床实践中应继续监测除颤器损坏情况。