Performance of an automated external defibrillator during simulated rotor-wing critical care transports.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate whether an automated external defibrillator (AED) was accurate enough to analyze the heart rhythm during a simulated rotor wing critical care transport. We hypothesized that AED analysis of the simulated rhythms during a helicopter flight would result in significant errors (i.e., inappropriate shocks, analysis delay).

Methods: Three commercial AEDs were tested for analyzing the heart rhythm in a helicopter using a manikin and a human volunteer. Ventricular fibrillation (VF), sinus rhythm, and asystole were simulated by using an arrhythmia simulator of the manikin. The intervals from analysis to shock recommendation were collected on a stationary and in-motion helicopter. Sensitivity and specificity of three AEDs were also calculated. Vibration intensities were measured with a digital vibration meter placed on the chest of the manikin/human volunteer both on the stretcher and on the floor of the helicopter.

Results: All AEDs correctly recommended shock delivery for the cardiac rhythms of the manikin. Sensitivity for VF was 100.0% (95% CI 91.2-100.0) and specificity for sinus rhythm and asystole were 100.0% (95% CI 91.2-100.0). Although the recorded ECG rhythms of the volunteer in an in-motion helicopter showed baseline artifacts, all AEDs analyzed the cardiac rhythm of the volunteer correctly and did not recommend shock delivery. On the floor of the helicopter, the median measured vibration intensity was 6.6 m/s(2) (IQR 5.5-7.7 m/s(2)) with significantly less vibrations transmitted to the manikin/human volunteer chest (manikin median 3.1 m/s(2), IQR 2.2-4.0 m/s(2); human volunteer median 0.95 m/s(2), IQR 0.65-1.25 m/s(2)).

Conclusion: This study suggested that current AEDs could analyze the heart rhythm correctly during simulated helicopter transport. Further studies using an animal model would be needed before applying to patients.