Why the study?
Little is known about international policies and requirements regarding AED placement on commercial aircraft, as well as the incidence and outcomes of AED utilisation for in-flight cardiac arrest.
Does the use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) improve survival in individuals experiencing in-flight cardiac arrest on commercial aircraft?
Does the use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) improve survival in individuals experiencing in-flight cardiac arrest on commercial aircraft?
In-flight AED use is feasible and associated with a 37% survival rate in patients with shockable rhythms, highlighting the need for broader policies mandating AED placement on commercial aircraft.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Sparse in-flight AED data leaves open optimal aviation policy; standardized mandates and prospective registries needed before broad adoption.
ABSTRACT Introduction Automated external defibrillators (AEDs) are increasingly available in public places for the treatment of cardiac arrest. Some commercial aircraft carry an AED, but little is known about international policies and requirements. The aim is to review policy regarding AED placement on commercial aircraft, summarising reported incidence and outcomes of AED utilisation for individuals experiencing an in-flight cardiac arrest (IFCA). Methods A scoping review was undertaken. Online databases (Medline and CINAHL) were searched using prespecified terms to identify reports evidencing use, outcome and policy of AEDS for IFCA on commercial aircraft. Reports were screened and data extracted following scoping review extraction methods. Data were analysed to describe incidence of AED use and outcomes following IFCA, and policies regarding AED placement on commercial aircraft. Results 9 observational studies were identified. 8 reported instances of successful shock delivery using AED. No published reports of safety incidents involving in-flight AED use were found. 7 studies reported survival following AED use: of these, 6 reported administration of a shock for IFCA survivors, whilst 1 study reported deployment of an AED without shock delivery. Overall, survival following in-flight AED use was 9%, with 37% survival reported where patients presented with shockable rhythm. Only one policy mandating AED placement on commercial aircraft was identified. Conclusion Despite the small, retrospective and observational nature of the reports identified, findings suggest in-flight AED use is feasible and associated with improved outcomes from IFCA. Keywords: cardiac arrest; defibrillators; AED; aircraft; flight
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sheehan et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: