Search

Background: Public automated external defibrillator (AED) registries aim to increase layperson defibrillation for victims of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. This study aims to characterize Canadian AED registries and the process by which these databases are updated and used. Methods: A survey was administered to representatives from each eligible AED registry. Collected data included information on registry management, AED validation process, linkage to emergency medical dispatch (EMD), and number of AEDs per registry. Three unregistered AEDs in each region were then located and registered into their respective registry. The primary endpoint was the proportion of AEDs that became visible in the registry within 1 month. Results: Of the 9 Canadian provinces that have registries, 7 are provincial, whereas 2 contain smaller independent registries. The survey was completed by 90% of contacted registries. The number of AEDs per registry ranged from 21 to 443 per 100,000 persons. Six registries are managed by a provincial government, 6 use a standardized validation process, and 8 are linked to EMD. Of the 21 AEDs registered by our study personnel in 7/10 registries, 9 (43%) were made available to the public within 1 month of registration. Only 1 registry employed an AED validation process that included direct contact with AED managers. Conclusions: Canadian public AED registries demonstrate significant differences in their governance and administrative processes. A majority of registries are integrated with EMD for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, but not all registries use a standardized validation process to ensure accuracy of AED information submitted by the public. Résumé: Introduction: Les registres publics de défibrillateurs externes automatiques (DEA) ont pour objectif d’accroître la défibrillation par des non-professionnels aux victimes d’arrêt cardiaque extra-hospitalier. La présente étude a pour objectif de décrire les registres canadiens de DEA et le processus par lequel ces bases de données sont actualisées et utilisées. Méthodes: Les représentants de chaque registre admissible de DEA ont répondu à une enquête. Les données recueillies étaient les suivantes : les renseignements sur la prise en charge du registre, le processus de validation des DEA, la liaison avec la répartition médicale d’urgence (RMU) et le nombre de DEA par registre. Trois DEA non enregistrés dans chaque région ont ensuite été localisés et inscrits dans leur registre respectif. L'issue principale était la proportion de DEA qui étaient visibles au registre en un mois. Résultats: Dans les neuf provinces canadiennes qui ont des registres, sept ont des registres provinciaux, alors que deux comptaient des registres indépendants plus petits. Quatre-vingt-dix pour cent des représentants des registres ont rempli l’enquête. Le nombre de DEA par registre allait de 21 à 443 par 100 000 personnes. Six registres sont gérés par les autorités provinciales, six utilisent un processus de validation standardisé et huit sont liés à la RMU. Parmi les 21 DEA enregistrés par notre personnel d’étude dans 7/10 registres, neuf (43 %) ont été mis à la disposition du public un mois après leur enregistrement. Seul un registre utilisait un processus de validation des DEA qui consistait en un contact direct avec les gestionnaires de DEA. Conclusions: Les registres publics canadiens de DEA démontrent des différences significatives dans leurs processus administratifs et de gestion. La majorité des registres sont intégrés à la RMU pour la gestion des arrêts cardiaques extra-hospitaliers, mais ce ne sont pas tous les registres qui utilisent un processus de validation standardisé pour garantir l’exactitude des renseignements sur les DEA soumis par le public.

Patients suffering from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) are frequently transported to the closest hospital. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is often indicated following OHCA. This study's primary objective was to determine the association between being transported to a PCI-capable hospital and survival to discharge for patients with OHCA. The additional delay to hospital arrival which could offset a potential increase in survival associated with being transported to a PCI-capable center was also evaluated.This study used a registry of OHCA in Montreal, Canada. Adult patients transported to a hospital following a non-traumatic OHCA were included. Hospitals were dichotomized based on whether PCI was available on-site or not. The effect of hospital type on survival to discharge was assessed using a multivariable logistic regression. The added prehospital delay which could offset the increase in survival associated with being transported to a PCI-capable center was calculated using that regression.A total of 4922 patients were included, of whom 2389 (48%) were transported to a PCI-capable hospital and 2533 (52%) to a non-PCI-capable hospital. There was an association between being transported to a PCI-capable center and survival to discharge (adjusted odds ratio = 1.60 [95% confidence interval 1.25-2.05], p .001). Increasing the delay from call to hospital arrival by 14.0 min would offset the potential benefit of being transported to a PCI-capable center.It could be advantageous to redirect patients suffering from OHCA patients to PCI-capable centers if the resulting expected delay is of less than 14 min.