Comments on: Should AEDs be required?

By: Christopher

Christopher — Fri, 04 Jan 2013 17:43:50 +0000

Yep, a properly functioning AED will not shock a non-shockable rhythm.

Many AEDs will not shock rhythms that it believes are likely to be associated with a pulse too.

My point was there is no risk to the owner from the AED performing an inappropriate shock (they have occurred).

By: Thomas Bliss

Thomas Bliss — Fri, 04 Jan 2013 16:07:40 +0000

AED’s will only deliver a shock to a shockable rhythm. And most have voice coaching will guide you to deliver good CPR while waiting on EMS to arrive.

No shockable rhythm, no shock will be delivered.

There are a few success stories over on our website.
http://northwestresponse.com/stories-of-survival/

By: DensityDuck

DensityDuck — Wed, 02 Jan 2013 22:04:12 +0000

but on Grey’s Anatomy they always do that thing where they yell CLEAR and there’s that “boomp” sound and then the person comes back to life!! I think that all the stores should have these magic come-back-to-life machines. I even have one in my own home in case I die.

(At least, that’s pretty much the reasoning behind requiring AED to be present in retail stores and such places. Anyone remember that bit with Dan Hedaya on “e.r.”?)

******

I agree about the “training” bit. I always wonder who they expect to use these machines. Are they assuming that retail stores routinely train their employees in first-responder techniques that enable them to judge when an AED is needed and how it should be employed? But then, see above about the AED being a magic come-back-to-life machine.

By: WhiteCoat

WhiteCoat — Sat, 22 Dec 2012 20:17:55 +0000

Interesting, yet the law seems arbitrary, doesn’t it? The final version is here:
http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/431.690
Also did a little further research and found that several other states have passed mandatory AED laws.
http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/health/laws-on-cardiac-arrest-and-defibrillators-aeds.aspx

Don’t expect you to answer the questions below, but consider the following with respect to Oregon:

Are there any studies showing that sudden cardiac death occurs more often in businesses with more than 50 congregants per day or more than 50,000 square feet? If not, why the distinction?
What is the rational basis for excluding churches and church schools from the law?
Notice how the law doesn’t require training in how to use the AED or require anyone to actually use the AED – only that one be available.

Also curious if any of these laws have actually been shown to save any lives.
Would be an interesting follow up study to see how well these unfunded mandates actually work.

By: SeaSpray

SeaSpray — Sat, 22 Dec 2012 17:34:43 +0000

We had to be AED certified in patient Access/Admitting-ED Reg every year. However,considering ED staff was right around the corner from me I’d yell for help stat (if I knew they were close and available and/or call a code. That being said, I’d still do what I had to if they weren’t.

Just that on one shift, a man walked in not looking good, greeted me and said he had chest pain …sat down and died in front of me. All happened quickly and I did holler for help-STAT and they did respond in a heartbeat. (No pun intended) They brought him back, he was shipped out to a larger facility and lived.

During certification, we were told that local stores, schools and police officers had AED machines.

Stats might be low on how many people these machines help …but I’d be grateful if I were one of the 16% or 28% of the population that survived.

By: CJL

CJL — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 21:59:07 +0000

Do any of those studies mention the neurological status of the patients who survived to hospital discharge?

Maybe that doesn’t matter to some people, and alive in any condition is better than dead, but it’s part of this discussion…

By: DefendUSA

DefendUSA — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 18:17:34 +0000

Aye, yi-yi!!! What I think is that stores should use an enter at your own risk mentality and state with a physical sign:

“Should medical care be required, 911 will be called. Said retailer is not responsible for providing care for accidental injuries or emergencies while perusing the premises.”

And the bullshit will stop. Political correctness is killing our Country. There are NO guarantees in life!!

By: Andrew_M_Garland

Andrew_M_Garland — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 04:44:00 +0000

The typical solution to this sort of thing is a label, a giant label at the entrance to the store describing exactly what emergency treatments are not available.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:37:25 +0000

Depends on when the defib happened, worst case they’d go into VF/VT so good thing you have an AED attached! As for energies, they’re no longer 400J, most typically 120-200J biphasic. The amperages generated at the heart won’t cause physical harm. Inappropriate application of the pads can cause skin burns.

But honestly as long as they weren’t screaming for you to stop, how would you as a lay rescuer know not to press shock? Most AED failures are operator error, next most are battery related.

Liability wise I don’t see how the store would be liable if an AED incorrectly applied therapy given they properly maintained the device.

By: Tarl

Tarl — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:12:13 +0000

I’m interested in what happens when someone uses an AED and it was deemed to be either unnecessary or harmful. Because after all, applying a burning jolt to the chest is beneficial only if the alternative was death. But if someone wasn’t dying and they get 400 joules through their pericardium, that’s not good either.

(Yes, AEDs are supposed to check to make sure they are needed before applying the juice. And accelerators don’t stick, either).