AIMS: Shortening hands-off intervals can improve benefits from defibrillation. This study presents the performance of a shock advisory system (SAS), which aims to decrease the pre-shock pauses by triggering fast rhythm analysis at minimal delay after end of chest compressions (CC). METHODS: The SAS is evaluated on a database of 1301 samples from 311 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) from automated external defibrillators (AEDs). The following rhythms are identified: 788 asystoles (ASYS), 20 normal sinus rhythms (NSR), 394 other non-shockable rythms (ONS), 81 ventricular fibrillations (VF), 18 rapid ventricular tachycardias (VThi). SAS is launched in two-stages: first stage for accurate detection of actual end of CC (ReEoCC); second stage for early "Shock"/"No-Shock" decision by using all available artifact-free ECG signals after REoCC during 3, 5, 7 s. RESULTS: Performance of the presented SAS versus AEDs is compared. The median hands-off time gained from earlier starting of ECG analysis is 5.8 s and for earlier shock advice is 12.5 s to 8.5 s when SAS rhythm analysis lasts 3 s to 7 s. The SAS accuracy at 3-7 s is: specificity 97.7-98.9% (ASYS), 100-100% (NSR), 98.5-99.2% (ONS); sensitivity 91.4-98.8% (VF), 88.9-96.7% (VThi). CONCLUSION: This study indicates that shortening the pre-shock hands-off pause by more efficient management of the SAS process in AEDs is possible. For analysis duration of 5 s (7 s), the delay between the end of chest compressions and the shock advice can be reduced by 10.5 s (8.5 s) median, while AHA requirements for rhythm detection accuracy are met. The use of this solution in AEDs could provide more reliable rhythm analysis than methods applying filtering techniques during CC.
AIMS: Shortening hands-off intervals can improve benefits from defibrillation. This study presents the performance of a shock advisory system (SAS), which aims to decrease the pre-shock pauses by triggering fast rhythm analysis at minimal delay after end of chest compressions (CC). METHODS: The SAS is evaluated on a database of 1301 samples from 311 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) from automated external defibrillators (AEDs). The following rhythms are identified: 788 asystoles (ASYS), 20 normal sinus rhythms (NSR), 394 other non-shockable rythms (ONS), 81 ventricular fibrillations (VF), 18 rapid ventricular tachycardias (VThi). SAS is launched in two-stages: first stage for accurate detection of actual end of CC (ReEoCC); second stage for early "Shock"/"No-Shock" decision by using all available artifact-free ECG signals after REoCC during 3, 5, 7 s. RESULTS: Performance of the presented SAS versus AEDs is compared. The median hands-off time gained from earlier starting of ECG analysis is 5.8 s and for earlier shock advice is 12.5 s to 8.5 s when SAS rhythm analysis lasts 3 s to 7 s. The SAS accuracy at 3-7 s is: specificity 97.7-98.9% (ASYS), 100-100% (NSR), 98.5-99.2% (ONS); sensitivity 91.4-98.8% (VF), 88.9-96.7% (VThi). CONCLUSION: This study indicates that shortening the pre-shock hands-off pause by more efficient management of the SAS process in AEDs is possible. For analysis duration of 5 s (7 s), the delay between the end of chest compressions and the shock advice can be reduced by 10.5 s (8.5 s) median, while AHA requirements for rhythm detection accuracy are met. The use of this solution in AEDs could provide more reliable rhythm analysis than methods applying filtering techniques during CC.
Authors: Beatriz Chicote; Unai Irusta; Elisabete Aramendi; Raúl Alcaraz; José Joaquín Rieta; Iraia Isasi; Daniel Alonso; María Del Mar Baqueriza; Karlos Ibarguren Journal: Entropy (Basel) Date: 2018-08-09 Impact factor: 2.524
Authors: Sofia Ruiz de Gauna; Unai Irusta; Jesus Ruiz; Unai Ayala; Elisabete Aramendi; Trygve Eftestøl Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-01-09 Impact factor: 3.411