Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 20, 2026

Standardized Model of Ventricular Fibrillation and Advanced Cardiac Life Support in Swine
Published on: January 30, 2020
Automated external defibrillator use for in-hospital emergency management
G Huschak1, A Dünnebier2, U X Kaisers1
1Anaesthetist, Intensivist, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University of Leipzig, Medical Faculty, Leipzig, Germany.
Insights
Automated external defibrillators (AEDs) in hospitals may not improve survival for cardiac arrest patients when rapid response teams are available. This study found no survival benefit of AED use compared to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) alone.
Area of Science:
- Emergency Medicine
- Cardiology
- Clinical Research
Background:
- Hospitals aim for rapid defibrillation using automated external defibrillators (AEDs) within three minutes.
- The effectiveness of AED implementation alone in creating a 'heart-safe hospital' requires evaluation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To analyze the impact of AED use on cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) outcomes in a university tertiary care hospital.
- To compare survival rates between patients receiving CPR with and without AED assistance.
Main Methods:
- A cohort study analyzed 1008 in-hospital emergency calls.
- Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) cases were categorized based on AED utilization.
- Patient outcomes were compared between CPR-only and CPR with AED use groups.
Main Results:
- 484 patients (48%) experienced cardiac arrest and received CPR.
- The emergency team response time averaged 4.3 ± 4.0 minutes.
- Only 8% of CPR cases presented with a shockable rhythm; AEDs delivered shocks in 3 of 43 instances.
- No significant survival differences were observed between CPR-only and CPR with AED use.
Conclusions:
- In-hospital AED use did not demonstrate a survival benefit for cardiac arrest patients receiving CPR.
- The findings do not support routine AED deployment for in-hospital CPR when professional emergency response teams are readily available.
Abstract:
The in-hospital spread of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) is aimed to allow for a shock-delivery within three minutes. However, it has to be questioned if the implementation of AED alone really contributes to a 'heart-safe hospital'. We performed a cohort study of 1008 in-hospital emergency calls in a university tertiary care hospital, analysing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) cases with and without AED use. In total, 484 patients (48%) had cardiac arrest and received CPR. Response time of the emergency team was 4.3 ± 4.0 minutes. Only 8% percent of the CPR cases had a shockable rhythm. In three of 43 placements a shock was delivered by the AED. There were no differences in survival between patients with CPR only and CPR with AED use. Our data do not support the use of an AED for in-hospital CPR if a professional response team is rapidly available.
Related Concept Videos
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation III: AED Use
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation IV: Pharmacological Management
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation I: Adult
Dysrhythmias VI: Management of Dysrhythmias
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation II: ACLS Airway Management
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care

