The impact of drone delivery of an automated external defibrillator: a simulation feasibility study.

Owen Finney, Kate Snowdon, Sara Lomzynska, Danielle Ferraresi, Michael Norton, David Austin, Chris P Gale, Chris Wilkinson, Graham McClelland
{"title":"The impact of drone delivery of an automated external defibrillator: a simulation feasibility study.","authors":"Owen Finney, Kate Snowdon, Sara Lomzynska, Danielle Ferraresi, Michael Norton, David Austin, Chris P Gale, Chris Wilkinson, Graham McClelland","doi":"10.29045/14784726.2025.6.10.1.56","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a leading cause of death in Europe. Early defibrillation is associated with improved outcomes. While this may be delivered by members of the public using an automated external defibrillator (AED), they are used infrequently. Drone delivery of an AED may enable quicker defibrillation compared to awaiting arrival of emergency medical services. Little is known about how members of the public may react to AED delivery or about the potential impact of retrieving an AED on the provision of high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A feasibility study using a simulated OHCA scenario was completed by members of the public. Participants performed CPR on a manikin, guided by an ambulance service call handler, which was interrupted by AED delivery. CPR quality and the duration of the interruption for AED retrieval were recorded, and participants' feedback on the scenario was collected using a survey.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve participants completed the study. Overall, a median of 61% (interquartile range [IQR] 21-79) of chest compressions were delivered at the correct speed, and 99% (IQR 78-100) at the correct depth. CPR was discontinued for a median of 116 (96-135) seconds to retrieve an AED and deliver a shock. Participants described the scenario as stressful and challenging, were supportive of the concept of AED delivery by drone and emphasised the value of call-handler instructions and guidance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrated the feasibility of a process and outcomes evaluation of simulated drone-delivered AED to members of the public. The retrieval process was associated with notable interruption in the delivery of CPR, but it remains unknown whether any impact of this may be offset by expedited use of the AED. Understanding the likely overall impact of drone delivery of AEDs on patient outcomes is critical before this approach should be considered in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":72470,"journal":{"name":"British paramedic journal","volume":"10 1","pages":"56-61"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12543074/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British paramedic journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29045/14784726.2025.6.10.1.56","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a leading cause of death in Europe. Early defibrillation is associated with improved outcomes. While this may be delivered by members of the public using an automated external defibrillator (AED), they are used infrequently. Drone delivery of an AED may enable quicker defibrillation compared to awaiting arrival of emergency medical services. Little is known about how members of the public may react to AED delivery or about the potential impact of retrieving an AED on the provision of high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).

Methods: A feasibility study using a simulated OHCA scenario was completed by members of the public. Participants performed CPR on a manikin, guided by an ambulance service call handler, which was interrupted by AED delivery. CPR quality and the duration of the interruption for AED retrieval were recorded, and participants' feedback on the scenario was collected using a survey.

Results: Twelve participants completed the study. Overall, a median of 61% (interquartile range [IQR] 21-79) of chest compressions were delivered at the correct speed, and 99% (IQR 78-100) at the correct depth. CPR was discontinued for a median of 116 (96-135) seconds to retrieve an AED and deliver a shock. Participants described the scenario as stressful and challenging, were supportive of the concept of AED delivery by drone and emphasised the value of call-handler instructions and guidance.

Conclusion: This study demonstrated the feasibility of a process and outcomes evaluation of simulated drone-delivered AED to members of the public. The retrieval process was associated with notable interruption in the delivery of CPR, but it remains unknown whether any impact of this may be offset by expedited use of the AED. Understanding the likely overall impact of drone delivery of AEDs on patient outcomes is critical before this approach should be considered in clinical practice.

无人机运送自动体外除颤器的影响:模拟可行性研究。
院外心脏骤停(OHCA)是欧洲的主要死亡原因。早期除颤可改善预后。虽然这可能是由公众使用自动体外除颤器(AED)提供的,但它们很少被使用。与等待紧急医疗服务的到来相比,无人机运送AED可以更快地实现除颤。对于公众对AED的反应,以及提取AED对提供高质量心肺复苏(CPR)的潜在影响,我们知之甚少。方法:利用公众参与的模拟OHCA情景进行可行性研究。参与者在救护车服务呼叫处理人员的指导下对人体模型进行心肺复苏术,这一过程被AED传送打断。记录心肺复苏术的质量和AED恢复中断的持续时间,并通过调查收集参与者对该场景的反馈。结果:12名参与者完成了研究。总体而言,61%(四分位数范围[IQR] 21-79)的胸外按压以正确的速度进行,99% (IQR 78-100)的胸外按压以正确的深度进行。停止心肺复苏术的平均时间为116秒(96-135秒),以便取出AED并实施电击。与会者认为,这种情况压力很大,具有挑战性,他们支持无人机提供AED的概念,并强调了呼叫处理人员指令和指导的价值。结论:本研究向公众展示了模拟无人机递送AED的过程和结果评估的可行性。恢复过程与心肺复苏术的实施明显中断有关,但目前尚不清楚这种影响是否可以通过加速使用AED来抵消。在临床实践中考虑这种方法之前,了解无人机交付aed对患者预后的整体影响是至关重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书