首页> 外文期刊>Prehospital emergency care >Automated external defibrillator (AED) utilization rates and reasons fire and police first responders did not apply AEDs.
【24h】

Automated external defibrillator (AED) utilization rates and reasons fire and police first responders did not apply AEDs.

机译:自动体外除颤器(AED)利用率以及火灾和警察第一响应者未使用AED的原因。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: To determine the rate at which fire and police first responders (FRs) apply automated external defibrillators (AEDs) and to ascertain reasons for not applying them. METHODS: Twenty-one emergency medical services (EMS) systems whose FRs had been supplied with AEDs by a philanthropic foundation provided data for all out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients. Data including the incidence of AED application and explanations for not applying AEDs were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 2,456 OHCAs were reported. AED application information was available for 2,439 patients and revealed that FRs had not applied AEDs to 1,025 patients (42%). Fire FRs were more likely than police FRs to have applied AEDs (relative risk 1.87, 95% confidence interval 1.65-2.12). Reasons for not applying AEDs were listed for 664 (65%) of the OHCA patients to whom AEDs had not been applied. The predominant reason the FRs did not apply an AED was that the transporting ambulance defibrillator had already been applied (74%). However, when response times for FRs and the transporting ambulances were compared for these OHCA patients, it was found that the transporting ambulances arrived after the FRs 23% the time, simultaneously with the FRs 45% of the time, and before the FRs only 32% of the time. CONCLUSION: Fire and police FRs did not apply AEDs to a significant number of OHCA patients. Use of the transport ambulance defibrillator was the primary reason given for not applying the FR AED. Given low AED application rates by FRs, future studies are needed to determine the characteristics of communities in which equipping FRs with AEDs is the most beneficial deployment strategy, and how to increase AED application by FRs in communities with FR AED programs.
机译:目的:确定火灾和警察第一响应者(FR)使用自动体外除颤器(AED)的速率,并确定不使用它们的原因。方法:由慈善基金会向其急诊室提供抗癫痫药的二十一种紧急医疗服务(EMS)系统为所有院外心脏骤停(OHCA)患者提供了数据。使用描述性统计数据分析了包括AED发生率和不使用AED的解释在内的数据。结果:总共报告了2456个OHCA。 AED的应用信息适用于2,439例患者,并显示FR尚未对1,025例患者(42%)应用AED。火灾FR较警察FR更有可能使用AED(相对风险1.87,95%置信区间1.65-2.12)。 664名(65%)未使用AED的OHCA患者中列出了不使用AED的原因。 FR不使用AED的主要原因是运输救护除颤器已经被使用(74%)。但是,当比较这些OHCA患者的FRs和转运救护车的响应时间时,发现转运救护车到达FRs的时间是23%,FRs到达时间是45%,而FRs才到达32 % 的时间。结论:消防和警察FR没有将AED应用于大量的OHCA患者。使用运输救护车除颤器是未使用FR AED的主要原因。鉴于FR的AED施用率低,需要进行进一步的研究来确定以FR装备AED是最有益的部署策略的社区的特征,以及如何在具有FR AED计划的社区中增加FR的AED应用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号