BACKGROUND: Public access defibrillation with automated external defibrillators (AEDs) can improve survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) occurring in public. Increasing the effective range of AEDs may improve coverage for public location OHCAs. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the relationship between AED effective range and public location cardiac arrest coverage. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Epistry database. We included all public-location, atraumatic, EMS-attended OHCAs in Toronto, Canada between December 16, 2005 and July 15, 2010. We ran a mathematical model for AED placement that maximizes coverage of historical public OHCAs given pre-specified values of AED effective range and the number of locations to place AEDs. Locations of all non-residential buildings were obtained from the City of Toronto and used as candidate sites for AED placement. Coverage was evaluated for range values from 10 to 300 m and number of AED locations from 10 to 200, both in increments of 10, for a total of 600 unique scenarios. Coverage from placing AEDs in all public buildings was also measured. RESULTS: There were 1310 public location OHCAs during the study period, with 25,851 non-residential buildings identified as candidate sites for AED placement. Cardiac arrest coverage increased with AED effective range, with improvements in coverage diminishing at higher ranges. For example, for a deployment of 200 AED locations, increasing effective range from 100 m to 200 m covered an additional 15% of cardiac arrests, whereas increasing range further from 200 m to 300 m covered an additional 10%. Placing an AED in each of the 25,851 public buildings resulted in coverage of 50% and 95% under assumed effective ranges of 50 m and 300 m, respectively. CONCLUSION: Increasing AED effective range can improve cardiac arrest coverage. Mathematical models can help evaluate the potential impact of initiatives which increase AED range.
BACKGROUND: Public access defibrillation with automated external defibrillators (AEDs) can improve survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) occurring in public. Increasing the effective range of AEDs may improve coverage for public location OHCAs. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the relationship between AED effective range and public location cardiac arrest coverage. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium Epistry database. We included all public-location, atraumatic, EMS-attended OHCAs in Toronto, Canada between December 16, 2005 and July 15, 2010. We ran a mathematical model for AED placement that maximizes coverage of historical public OHCAs given pre-specified values of AED effective range and the number of locations to place AEDs. Locations of all non-residential buildings were obtained from the City of Toronto and used as candidate sites for AED placement. Coverage was evaluated for range values from 10 to 300 m and number of AED locations from 10 to 200, both in increments of 10, for a total of 600 unique scenarios. Coverage from placing AEDs in all public buildings was also measured. RESULTS: There were 1310 public location OHCAs during the study period, with 25,851 non-residential buildings identified as candidate sites for AED placement. Cardiac arrest coverage increased with AED effective range, with improvements in coverage diminishing at higher ranges. For example, for a deployment of 200 AED locations, increasing effective range from 100 m to 200 m covered an additional 15% of cardiac arrests, whereas increasing range further from 200 m to 300 m covered an additional 10%. Placing an AED in each of the 25,851 public buildings resulted in coverage of 50% and 95% under assumed effective ranges of 50 m and 300 m, respectively. CONCLUSION: Increasing AED effective range can improve cardiac arrest coverage. Mathematical models can help evaluate the potential impact of initiatives which increase AED range.
Authors: R L Page; J A Joglar; R C Kowal; J D Zagrodzky; L L Nelson; K Ramaswamy; S J Barbera; M H Hamdan; D K McKenas Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-10-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Laurie J Morrison; Graham Nichol; Thomas D Rea; Jim Christenson; Clifton W Callaway; Shannon Stephens; Ronald G Pirrallo; Dianne L Atkins; Daniel P Davis; Ahamed H Idris; Craig Newgard Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2008-05-13 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Myron L Weisfeldt; Colleen M Sitlani; Joseph P Ornato; Thomas Rea; Tom P Aufderheide; Daniel Davis; Jonathan Dreyer; Erik P Hess; Jonathan Jui; Justin Maloney; George Sopko; Judy Powell; Graham Nichol; Laurie J Morrison Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-04-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Graham Nichol; Elizabeth Thomas; Clifton W Callaway; Jerris Hedges; Judy L Powell; Tom P Aufderheide; Tom Rea; Robert Lowe; Todd Brown; John Dreyer; Dan Davis; Ahamed Idris; Ian Stiell Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-09-24 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: A P Hallstrom; J P Ornato; M Weisfeldt; A Travers; J Christenson; M A McBurnie; R Zalenski; L B Becker; E B Schron; M Proschan Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-08-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Benjamin W Chrisinger; Anne V Grossestreuer; Meredith C Laguna; Heather M Griffis; Charles C Branas; Douglas J Wiebe; Raina M Merchant Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2016-10-01 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Christopher L F Sun; Derya Demirtas; Steven C Brooks; Laurie J Morrison; Timothy C Y Chan Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2016-08-23 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Justin J Boutilier; Steven C Brooks; Alyf Janmohamed; Adam Byers; Jason E Buick; Cathy Zhan; Angela P Schoellig; Sheldon Cheskes; Laurie J Morrison; Timothy C Y Chan Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-03-02 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Christopher L F Sun; Lena Karlsson; Laurie J Morrison; Steven C Brooks; Fredrik Folke; Timothy C Y Chan Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2020-08-20 Impact factor: 5.501