Moritz Nettinger , Johannes Wittig , Dung Nguyen Riis , Bo Løfgren , Kasper G Lauridsen
{"title":"人工除颤器与自动体外除颤器的使用与院内心脏骤停期间除颤和复苏质量的关系","authors":"Moritz Nettinger , Johannes Wittig , Dung Nguyen Riis , Bo Løfgren , Kasper G Lauridsen","doi":"10.1016/j.resuscitation.2025.110619","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Manual Defibrillators and Automated external defibrillators (AEDs) are frequently used during in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA), yet comparisons of their performance remain limited. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of rhythm analyses and chest compression pause durations of manual defibrillator and AED usage during IHCA.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In this multicenter cohort study, we analysed thoracic impedance data and electrocardiograms from manual defibrillators and AEDs used during IHCA occurring in the Central Denmark Region between April 2019 and March 2024. The primary outcome was the difference in accuracy of rhythm analyses, while secondary outcomes included chest compression pause duration for rhythm analysis and defibrillation.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 529 cardiac arrests were analysed, yielding 1715 rhythm analyses from manual defibrillators and 602 AED analyses. The difference in the accuracy of rhythm analyses between a manual defibrillator and an AED was statistically not significant with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.5 (95%-CI: 0.2; 1.3). Manual defibrillator use was associated with 3.2 s (95%-CI: 1.7; 4.9) shorter pauses for rhythm analysis and 7.9 s (95%-CI: 5.9; 9.9) shorter <em>peri</em>-shock pauses.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Using manual defibrillators compared to AEDs was not associated with a higher accuracy of rhythm analyses, but with shorter chest compression pause durations for rhythm analysis and shorter <em>peri</em>-shock pauses.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21052,"journal":{"name":"Resuscitation","volume":"212 ","pages":"Article 110619"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Associations of manual defibrillator compared to automated external defibrillator usage with defibrillation and resuscitation quality during in-hospital cardiac arrest\",\"authors\":\"Moritz Nettinger , Johannes Wittig , Dung Nguyen Riis , Bo Løfgren , Kasper G Lauridsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.resuscitation.2025.110619\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Manual Defibrillators and Automated external defibrillators (AEDs) are frequently used during in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA), yet comparisons of their performance remain limited. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of rhythm analyses and chest compression pause durations of manual defibrillator and AED usage during IHCA.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In this multicenter cohort study, we analysed thoracic impedance data and electrocardiograms from manual defibrillators and AEDs used during IHCA occurring in the Central Denmark Region between April 2019 and March 2024. The primary outcome was the difference in accuracy of rhythm analyses, while secondary outcomes included chest compression pause duration for rhythm analysis and defibrillation.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 529 cardiac arrests were analysed, yielding 1715 rhythm analyses from manual defibrillators and 602 AED analyses. The difference in the accuracy of rhythm analyses between a manual defibrillator and an AED was statistically not significant with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.5 (95%-CI: 0.2; 1.3). Manual defibrillator use was associated with 3.2 s (95%-CI: 1.7; 4.9) shorter pauses for rhythm analysis and 7.9 s (95%-CI: 5.9; 9.9) shorter <em>peri</em>-shock pauses.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Using manual defibrillators compared to AEDs was not associated with a higher accuracy of rhythm analyses, but with shorter chest compression pause durations for rhythm analysis and shorter <em>peri</em>-shock pauses.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21052,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Resuscitation\",\"volume\":\"212 \",\"pages\":\"Article 110619\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Resuscitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300957225001315\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resuscitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300957225001315","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Associations of manual defibrillator compared to automated external defibrillator usage with defibrillation and resuscitation quality during in-hospital cardiac arrest
Background
Manual Defibrillators and Automated external defibrillators (AEDs) are frequently used during in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA), yet comparisons of their performance remain limited. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of rhythm analyses and chest compression pause durations of manual defibrillator and AED usage during IHCA.
Methods
In this multicenter cohort study, we analysed thoracic impedance data and electrocardiograms from manual defibrillators and AEDs used during IHCA occurring in the Central Denmark Region between April 2019 and March 2024. The primary outcome was the difference in accuracy of rhythm analyses, while secondary outcomes included chest compression pause duration for rhythm analysis and defibrillation.
Results
A total of 529 cardiac arrests were analysed, yielding 1715 rhythm analyses from manual defibrillators and 602 AED analyses. The difference in the accuracy of rhythm analyses between a manual defibrillator and an AED was statistically not significant with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.5 (95%-CI: 0.2; 1.3). Manual defibrillator use was associated with 3.2 s (95%-CI: 1.7; 4.9) shorter pauses for rhythm analysis and 7.9 s (95%-CI: 5.9; 9.9) shorter peri-shock pauses.
Conclusion
Using manual defibrillators compared to AEDs was not associated with a higher accuracy of rhythm analyses, but with shorter chest compression pause durations for rhythm analysis and shorter peri-shock pauses.
期刊介绍:
Resuscitation is a monthly international and interdisciplinary medical journal. The papers published deal with the aetiology, pathophysiology and prevention of cardiac arrest, resuscitation training, clinical resuscitation, and experimental resuscitation research, although papers relating to animal studies will be published only if they are of exceptional interest and related directly to clinical cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Papers relating to trauma are published occasionally but the majority of these concern traumatic cardiac arrest.