Survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is poor in communities served only by basic ambulance services, but conventional advanced prehospital care is not an option for most rural communities. Ambulance technicians in 18 small communities (average population, 10,400) were trained to recognize and defibrillate ventricular fibrillation. Neither endotracheal intubation nor medication was used. Twelve additional communities of similar size where such early defibrillation was not attempted provided control data. In the communities where early defibrillation was available, 12 of 64 patients (19 per cent) who were found in ventricular fibrillation were resuscitated and discharged alive from the hospital; this was true of only 1 of 31 such patients (3 per cent) in the control communities, where only basic life support was available (P less than 0.05). Ten (83 per cent) of the long-term survivors received electrical shocks administered solely by the technicians. Early defibrillation by minimally trained ambulance technicians is an effective approach to emergency cardiac care in rural communities.

Automatic external defibrillators (AEDs) may have advantages over manual defibrillation in managing prehospital cardiac arrest, particularly in rural communities. We conducted a two-part evaluation of a commercially available AED. We first established the diagnostic accuracy of the AED's rhythm recognition algorithm by challenging it with 205 cardiac arrest rhythms previously recorded from actual patients in the field. The AED demonstrated 100% specificity and 92% sensitivity for ventricular fibrillation (VF) in this nonclinical setting. We then compared the clinical efficacy of AEDs in 18 small communities (study group) with that of manual defibrillation in 18 additional communities (control group) of similar size. Ambulance technicians using manual defibrillators correctly diagnosed VF more frequently than the AEDs (98% vs 83%; p < .025). Specificity for VF was similar in the two groups (100% for AEDs vs 94% for technicians; p > .10). AEDs were able to deliver shocks more quickly than was possible with the manual defibrillators (1.56 vs 2.77 min; p < .001). The ability of the AEDs to terminate VF was excellent, converting VF in 28 of 29 (97%) patients to some other rhythm compared with only 37 of 53 (70%) patients in the control group (p < .01). Hospital admission and discharge rates were similar for the two groups. Ten of the 35 (29%) patients managed with AEDs achieved admission and six (17%) were ultimately discharged. In the control group 17 of 53 (33%) patients with VF were admitted and seven (13%) were discharged (p > .75). AEDs are an effective alternative to manual defibrillation in small communities.Circulation 73, No. 4, 701-709, 1986. CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE continues to be the leading cause of death in the United States, particularly sudden cardiac death occurring outside of the hospital.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract