Outcomes of Rapid Defibrillation by Security Officers after Cardiac Arrest in Casinos

The study objective was to develop a simple, generalizable predictive model for survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation. Logistic regression analysis of two retrospective series (n=205 and n=1667, respectively) of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests was performed on data sets from a Southwestern city (population, 415,000; area, 406 km2) and a Northwestern county (population, 1,038,000; area, 1399 km2). Both are served by similar two-tiered emergency response systems. All arrests were witnessed and occurred before the arrival of emergency responders, and the initial cardiac rhythm observed was ventricular fibrillation. The main outcome measure was survival to hospital discharge. Patient age, initiation of CPR by bystanders, interval from collapse to CPR, interval from collapse to defibrillation, bystander CPR/collapse-to-CPR interval interaction, and collapse-to-CPR/collapse-to-defibrillation interval interaction were significantly associated with survival. There was not a significant difference between observed survival rates at the two sites after control for significant predictors. A simplified predictive model retaining only collapse to CPR and collapse to defibrillation intervals performed comparably to the more complicated explanatory model. The effectiveness of prehospital interventions for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest may be estimated from their influence on collapse to CPR and collapse to defibrillation intervals. A model derived from combined data from two geographically distinct populations did not identify site as a predictor of survival if clinically relevant predictor variables were controlled for. This model can be generalized to other US populations and used to project the local effectiveness of interventions to improve cardiac arrest survival.

Passengers who have ventricular fibrillation aboard commercial aircraft rarely survive, owing to the delay in obtaining emergency care and defibrillation. In 1997, a major U.S. airline began equipping its aircraft with automated external defibrillators. Flight attendants were trained in the use of the defibrillator and applied the device when passengers had a lack of consciousness, pulse, or respiration. The automated external defibrillator was also used as a monitor for other medical emergencies, generally at the direction of a passenger who was a physician. The electrocardiogram that was obtained during each use of the device was analyzed by two arrhythmia specialists for appropriateness of use. We analyzed data on all 200 instances in which the defibrillators were used between June 1, 1997, and July 15, 1999. Automated external defibrillators were used for 200 patients (191 on the aircraft and 9 in the terminal), including 99 with documented loss of consciousness. Electrocardiographic data were available for 185 patients. The administration of shock was advised in all 14 patients who had electrocardiographically documented ventricular fibrillation, and no shock was advised in the remaining patients (sensitivity and specificity of the defibrillator in identifying ventricular fibrillation, 100 percent). The first shock successfully defibrillated the heart in 13 patients (defibrillation was withheld in 1 case at the family's request). The rate of survival to discharge from the hospital after shock with the automated external defibrillator was 40 percent. A total of 36 patients either died or were resuscitated after cardiac arrest. No complications arose from use of the automated external defibrillator as a monitor in conscious passengers. The use of the automated external defibrillator aboard commercial aircraft is effective, with an excellent rate of survival to discharge from the hospital after conversion of ventricular fibrillation. There are not likely to be complications when the device is used as a monitor in the absence of ventricular fibrillation.

Published reports of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest give widely varying results. The variation in survival rates within each type of system is due, in part, to variation in definitions. To determine other reasons for differences in survival rates, we reviewed published studies conducted from 1967 to 1988 on 39 emergency medical services programs from 29 different locations. These programs could be grouped into five types of prehospital systems based on the personnel who deliver CPR, defibrillation, medications, and endotracheal intubation; the five systems were three types of single-response systems (basic emergency medical technician [EMT], EMT-defibrillation [EMT-D], and paramedic) and two double-response systems (EMT/paramedic and EMT-D/paramedic). Reported discharge rates ranged from 2% to 25% for all cardiac rhythms and from 3% to 33% for ventricular fibrillation. The lowest survival rates occurred in single-response systems and the highest rates in double-response systems, although there was considerable variation within each type of system. Hypothetical survival curves suggest that the ability to resuscitate is a function of time, type, and sequence of therapy. Survival appears to be highest in double-response systems because CPR is started early. We speculate that early CPR permits definitive procedures, including defibrillation, medications, and intubation, to be more effective.