Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2002 Aug 27;106(9):1058-64.
doi: 10.1161/01.cir.0000028147.92190.a7.

Impact of community-wide police car deployment of automated external defibrillators on survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Affiliations

Impact of community-wide police car deployment of automated external defibrillators on survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Robert J Myerburg et al. Circulation. .

Abstract

Background: Disappointing survival rates from out-of-hospital cardiac arrests encourage strategies for faster defibrillation, such as use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) by nonconventional responders.

Methods and results: AEDs were provided to all Miami-Dade County, Florida, police. AED-equipped police (P-AED) and conventional emergency medical rescue (EMS) responders are simultaneously deployed to possible cardiac arrests. Times from 9-1-1 contact to the scene were compared for P-AED and concurrently deployed EMS, and both were compared with historical EMS experience. Survival with P-AED was compared with outcomes when EMS was the sole responder. Among 420 paired dispatches of P-AED and EMS, the mean+/-SD P-AED time from 9-1-1 call to arrival at the scene was 6.16+/-4.27 minutes, compared with 7.56+/-3.60 minutes for EMS (P<0.001). Police arrived first to 56% of the calls. The time to first responder arrival among P-AED and EMS was 4.88+/-2.88 minutes (P<0.001), compared with a historical response time of 7.64+/-3.66 minutes when EMS was the sole responder. A 17.2% survival rate was observed for victims with ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia (VT/VF), compared with 9.0% for standard EMS before P-AED implementation (P=0.047). However, VT/VF benefit was diluted by the observation that 61% of the initial rhythms were nonshockable, reducing the absolute survival benefit among the total study population to 1.6% (P-AED, 7.6%; EMS, 6.0%).

Conclusions: P-AED establishes a layer of responders that generate improved response times and survival from VT/VF. There was no benefit for victims with nonshockable rhythms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms