Bystander use of AEDs for witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrests remains low despite legislative efforts to improve access to the devices, according to a new study.

Of 9,290 cases studied, bystander resuscitation was only performed in 61.3%.

Bystander use of automated external defibrillators, or AEDs, for witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrests remains low despite legislative efforts to improve access to these life-saving devices at recreational facilities across the United States, according to a study recently published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Researchers at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and the University of Missouri-Kansas City reviewed how frequently bystanders used AEDs in 9,290 cases of witnessed cardiac arrest at recreational facilities, based on data from the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival (CARES). They further compared the frequency of AED use among states with and without enacted laws requiring the presence of AEDs on site at recreational facilities.

Although 46.8% of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest had shockable heart rhythms, bystander use of AEDs remained low across the country, with only 19% of bystanders using AEDs in AED-enacted law states, and 18.2% of bystanders using AEDs in non-law states, the JAMA study, published Jan. 2, found.

  • stoly@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    10 months ago

    The AED is only going to fix an irregular rhythm (which is what the shock does) which would mean that you don’t need CPR because the heart would then take on a more appropriate rhythm. If you can’t shock someone, then you must have CPR. In both cases, applying the AED would be a good choice because it will tell you either way.