Differences in the Usability of Fully Automated External Defibrillators between Medical and Nonmedical Professionals

Objective Early defibrillation is crucial for improving the survival rates of patients with shockable cardiac arrest (OHCA). Automated external defibrillators (AEDs) are essential in basic life support (BLS), yet their usage in out-of-hospital cardiac arrests remains around 10%. There are two types of AEDs: semi-automatic (s-AED) and fully automatic (f-AED), with the latter automatically delivering a shock if indicated. Although f-AEDs were introduced in Japan in 2021, they have not yet been widely adopted. The present study investigated whether or not the ease of use and preferences for these AED types differ between healthcare professionals and laypersons. Methods BLS courses, including training on both AED types, were conducted between 2021 and 2022 at our institution. The participants were divided into medical and non-medical professional groups, and a survey was administered. Results A total of 443 participants were included, with 47 medical professionals and 396 non-medical professionals. Notably, 401 participants were new to f-AED lectures. The medical professional group had more prior experience with AED training courses than non-medical professionals and showed a preference for s-AEDs, whereas the non-medical professional group showed no significant preference. Although a subset of participants expressed hesitation in pressing the shock button on the s-AEDs, no statistically significant difference was observed between the groups. Conclusion This study suggests that preferences for AED types may vary between medical and non-medical professional groups, with some reluctance in using s-AEDs. Although no significant differences in hesitation were found between the groups, f-AEDs may reduce hesitation and potentially improve AED effectiveness during cardiopulmonary resuscitation.