Jules Scadden, P.S,

CQI/Data Coordinator-Sac County Ambulance

National Association of EMTs (NAEMT)

jkscadden@gmail.com

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