Upload
shonda-dalton
View
217
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Jules Scadden, P.S,
CQI/Data Coordinator-Sac County Ambulance
National Association of EMTs (NAEMT)
EMS historically provided first defibrillation Studies- improved outcomes with rapid
defibrillation (1) (2)
EMS-Call-to-arrive often 4-5 min or longer PAD decreased time-defibrillation (1)
By-stander CPR with early defibrillation + coordination with local EMS improved survival rates
Lack of interoperability between devices Electrodes/Defib pads
Adult vs Peds modes requires pad changes Software Updates/Guideline changes Cost prohibitive to many EMS services and small
businesses Lack of EMS-PAD program collaboration
AED used at local high school during a community event. CPR was interrupted twice to change defib pads with arrival of local BLS ambulance and ALS ambulance
Volunteer FR AED fails on third shock—battery dead—unit had never been used/checked during monthly meetings indicated batteries were fine
Universal Electrodes and wiring systems Institute universal “Adult” vs “Peds” shock
button Remote protocol/algorithms/software updates Cost of AEDs must not be prohibitive Collaboration of AED placement/PAD programs
with local EMS
Universal pads/electrodes and wiring systems as well as an “adult” vs “Pediatric” shock button can improve patient outcomes by eliminating interrupted CPR
Remote system updates will ensure updates are installed in a timely manner, decreasing “out-of-service” time and potential machine failure
Significant cost increase with technology increases would place an increased burden on EMS services and potentially make PAD programs prohibitive.
Collaboration with local EMS services will enhance a PAD program and improve patient outcomes