Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Published 8 October 2008, doi:10.1136/bmj.a1816
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a1816
Uptake must be supported by a detailed programme of implementation
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
The evidence, as reported in guidelines from the European Resuscitation Council (ERC),1 that using automated external defibrillators in the management of cardiac arrest outside of hospital improves survival is strong. Because the survival rate decreases exponentially as the interval between cardiac arrest and defibrillation increases, the locations of first responders (people trained to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation who are not part of a professional emergency response system) and automated external defibrillators are particularly important. However, controversy surrounds the recommended sites for these defibrillators and the personnel who need to be trained in their use.2
Placing defibrillators in the workplace is controversial because cardiac arrest rarely occurs in this setting. This may explain the small number of studies—a review found only one specific original (retrospective) study on this subject and six others that studied defibrillators in various settings, including the workplace.2 3 4 5 6 7 Only 1-6% of all reported out of hospital cardiac arrests occurred
Alexis Descatha, occupational and emergency physician1, Michel Baer, director of university degree for occupational physicians2
1 UVSQ-AP-HP, Occupational Health Unit/INSERM U687, Prehospital Emergency Medical System of Department 92 ("SAMU 92"), Raymond Poincare University Hospital, F-92380 Garches, France , 2 AP-HP, Prehospital Emergency Medical System of Department 92 (SAMU 92)
alexis.descatha@rpc.aphp.fr
Read all Rapid Responses