Hands-on Defibrillation

 

 
 
 

Keith Wesley, MD, FACEP | | Monday, June 16, 2008


Review of:Lloyd MS, Heeke B, Walter PF, et al: "Hands-on defibrillation: an analysis of electrical current flow through rescuers in direct contact with patients during biphasic external defibrillation."Circulation. 117(19):2510-2514, 2008.

The Science

I'll attempt to describe this study without getting too technical for fear of being overwhelmed with e-mails from the techies out there. The researchers who were also the subjects of this study volunteered to maintain contact with a sedated patient who was undergoing elective cardioversion. They wore polyethelene medical gloves and simulated chest compressions. Pre-gelled electrodes similar to those used with AEDs were applied to their chests. The amount of stray current that passed through the "rescuer" was measured during biphasic cardioversion, and defibrillation energies ranged from 100 to 360 joules.

In no cases were shocks perceptible to the rescuer. Peak potential differences between the rescuer's wrist and thigh ranged from 0.28 to 14 V (mean 5.8 +/- 5.8 V). The average leakage current flowing through the rescuer's body for each phase of the shock waveform was 283 +/- 140 uA (range 18.9 to 907 uA). This was below several recommended safety standards for leakage current.

In the study, the researcher concluded, "Rescuers performing chest compressions during biphasic external defibrillation are exposed to low levels of leakage current. The present findings support the feasibility of uninterrupted chest compressions during shock delivery, which may enhance the efficacy of defibrillation and cardiocerebral resuscitation."

The Street

Well I'm not sure I'm ready to go that far, but this will probably be one of the most important papers published this year when we look to the future and the 2010 AHA guidelines. But before we go adopting this radical approach, let's first consider some caveats the authors mention.

What about conduction if the rescuer is not wearing gloves? What's the difference if you're still using the older machines with paddles? We have all seen them arc. The authors don't discuss it, but is there a difference between the conduction with a monophasic machine? I don't know, but I suspect the answer will be that it's far less than we feared.

I continue to encounter services with policies that require them to pull over and come to a complete stop on the side of the road to perform defibrillation. Why? I believe this comes from the fear we had when we introduced this unknown device to EMTs in the early 80's. We said not to touch the patient. Don't defibrillate on a metal grate, wet ground, in the rain, etc, etc. Why? Because we simply didn't know. It's 28 years later, and we haven't had any significant instances of rescuers harmed while providing care.

Perhaps it's time to re-evaluate our operational policies in light of science. Defibrillate safely. Perhaps safely is just slowing down and not taking the turn so sharply, instead of coming to a stop where oncoming traffic can hit you. Perhaps, just perhaps, the AED isn't as dangerous to us as we feared as long as we use it appropriately. And just maybe if this study is repeated in other conditions with other devices, we may be able to keep on pushing while it charges and shocks.




Connect: Have a thought or feedback about this? Add your comment now
Related Topics: Cardiac and Circulation, Provider Wellness and Safety

 
What's Your Take? Comment Now ...

Featured Careers & Jobs in EMS





 

Get JEMS in Your Inbox

 

Fire EMS Blogs


Blogger Browser

Today's Featured Posts

 

EMS Airway Clinic

Innovation & Progress

Follow in the footsteps of these inspirational leaders of EMS.
More >

Multimedia Thumb

Four Killed in New Mexico Medical Plane Crash

Crash near fairgrounds claims patient and crew of three.
Watch It >


Multimedia Thumb

Texas Ambulance Involved in Crash

Odessa ambulance and car collide during response.
Watch It >


Multimedia Thumb

Las Vegas Fire, AMR Reach New Deal

Tentative agreement reached over ambulance calls.
Watch It >


Multimedia Thumb

Fire Damages Several Homes in California Earthquake

Four homes destroyed and others damaged after quake rattles Napa.
Watch It >


Multimedia Thumb

New Mexico Air Ambulance Crash

NTSB investigates crash that killed four.
More >


Multimedia Thumb

Where in the World of EMS is A.J.? Scranton

JEMS Editor-in-Chief visits his hometown of Scranton, Pa.
More >


Multimedia Thumb

Over 100 Injured in California Earthquake

172 patients treated at Napa hospital after 6.0-magnitude earthquake.
More >


Multimedia Thumb

The AmbuBus®, Bus Stretcher Conversion Kit - EMS Today 2013

AmbuBus®, Bus Stretcher all-hazards preparedness & response tool
Watch It >


Multimedia Thumb

VividTrac offered by Vivid Medical - EMS Today 2013

VividTrac, affordable high performance video intubation device.
Watch It >


Multimedia Thumb

LMA MAD Nasal™

Needle-free intranasal drug delivery.
Watch It >


Multimedia Thumb

Field Bridge Xpress ePCR on iPad, Android, Kindle Fire

Sneak peek of customizable run forms & more.
Watch It >


More Product Videos >