These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Simulating Public Buses as a Mobile Platform for Deployment of Publicly Accessible Automated External Defibrillators.
    Author: Hajari H, Salerno J, Weiss LS, Menegazzi JJ, Karimi H, Salcido DD.
    Journal: Prehosp Emerg Care; 2020; 24(2):238-244. PubMed ID: 31124734.
    Abstract:
    Introduction: Public access defibrillation (PAD) programs seek to optimize locations of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) to minimize the time from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) recognition to defibrillation. Most PAD programs have focused on static AED (S-AED) locations in high traffic areas; pervasive electronic data infrastructure incorporating real-time geospatial data opens the possibility for AED deployment on mobile infrastructure for retrieval by nearby non-passengers. Performance characteristics of such systems are not known. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that publicly accessible AEDs located on buses would increase publicly accessible AED coverage and reduce AED retrieval time relative to statically located AEDs. Methods: S-AED sites in Pittsburgh, PA were identified and consolidated to 1 AED per building for analysis (n = 582). Public bus routes and schedules were obtained from the Port Authority of Allegheny County. OHCA locations and times were obtained from the Pittsburgh site of the Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium. Two simulations were conducted to assess the characteristics and impact of AEDs located on buses. In Simulation #1, geographic coverage area of AEDs located on buses (B-AEDs) was estimated using a 1/8th mile (201 m) retrieval radius during weekday, Saturday and Sunday periods. Cumulative geographic coverage across each period of the week was compared to S-AED coverage and the added coverage provided by B-AEDs was calculated. In Simulation #2, spatiotemporal event coverage was estimated for historical OHCA events, assuming constraints designed to reflect real world AED retrieval scenarios. Event coverage and AED retrieval time were compared between B-AEDs and S-AEDs across periods of the week and residential/nonresidential spatial areas. Results: Cumulative geographic coverage by S-AEDs was 23% across all periods, assuming uniform access hours. B-AEDs alone versus B-AEDs + S-AEDs covered 20% vs. 34% (weekday), 14% + 30% (Saturday), and 10% + 28% (Sunday). There was no statistically significant difference in 3-minute historical AED accessibility between only B-AEDs and only S-AEDs in standalone deployments (12% vs. 14%). However, when allowing for retrieval of either type of AED in the same scenario, event coverage was improved to 22% (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Deployment of B-AEDs may improve AED coverage but not as a standalone deployment strategy.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]