Impact of Personal Protective Equipment on Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Resuscitation in Coronavirus Pandemic.

Background and Objectives: This retrospective study evaluated the clinical impact of enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) on the clinical outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Moreover, by focusing on the use of a powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR), we investigated the medical personnel's perceptions of wearing PAPR during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Materials and Methods: According to the arrival time at the emergency department, the patients were categorized into a conventional PPE group (1 August 2019 to 20 January 2020) and an enhanced PPE group (21 January 2020, to 31 August 2020). The primary outcomes of this analysis were the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) rate. Additionally, subjective perception of the medical staff regarding the effect of wearing enhanced PPE during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was evaluated by conducting a survey. Results: This study included 130 out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients, with 73 and 57 patients in the conventional and enhanced PPE groups, respectively. The median time intervals to first intubation and to report the first arterial blood gas analysis results were longer in the enhanced PPE group than in the conventional PPE group (3 min vs. 2 min; p = 0.020 and 8 min vs. 3 min; p < 0.001, respectively). However, there were no significant differences in the ROSC rate (odds ratio (OR) = 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-1.67; p = 0.542) and 1 month survival (OR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.07-2.10; p = 0.266) between the two groups. In total, 67 emergent department (ED) professionals responded to the questionnaire. Although a significant number of respondents experienced inconveniences with PAPR use, they agreed that PAPR was necessary during the CPR procedure for protection and reduction of infection transmission. Conclusion: The use of enhanced PPE, including PAPR, affected the performance of CPR to some extent but did not alter patient outcomes. PAPR use during the resuscitation of OHCA patients might positively impact the psychological stability of the medical staff.

Mismatches Between the Number of Installed Automated External Defibrillators and the Annual Rate of Automated External Defibrillator Use Among Places.

AIM: In South Korea, the law concerning automated external defibrillators (AEDs) states that they should be installed in specific places including apartment complexes. This study was conducted to investigate the current status and effectiveness of installation and usage of AEDs in South Korea. METHODS: Installation and usage of AEDs in South Korea is registered in the National Emergency Medical Center (NEMC) database. Compared were the installed number, usage, and annual rate of AED use according to places of installation. All data were obtained from the NEMC database. RESULTS: After excluding AEDs installed in ambulances or fire engines (n = 2,003), 36,498 AEDs were registered in South Korea from 1998 through 2018. A higher number of AEDs were installed in places required by the law compared with those not required by the law (20,678 [56.7%] vs. 15,820 [43.3%]; P <.001). Among them, 11,318 (31.0%) AEDs were installed in apartment complexes. The overall annual rate of AED use was 0.38% (95% CI, 0.33-0.44). The annual rate of AED use was significantly higher in places not required by the law (0.62% [95% CI, 0.52-0.72] versus 0.21% [95% CI, 0.16-0.25]; P <.001). The annual rate of AED use in apartment complexes was 0.13% (95% CI, 0.08-0.17). CONCLUSION: There were significant mismatches between the number of installed AEDs and the annual rate of AED use among places. To optimize the benefit of AEDs in South Korea, changes in the policy for selecting AED placement are needed.