BACKGROUND:Drone-delivered automated external defibrillators (AEDs) hold promises in the treatment of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Our objective was to estimate the time needed to perform resuscitation with a drone-delivered AED and to measure cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) quality.METHODS:Mock out-of-hospital cardiac arrest simulations that included a 9-1-1 call, CPR, and drone-delivered AED were conducted. Each simulation was timed and video-recorded. CPR performance metrics were recorded by a Laerdal Resusci Anne Quality Feedback System. Multivariable regression modeling examined factors associated with time from 9-1-1 call to AED shock and CPR quality metrics (compression rate, depth, recoil, and chest compression fraction). Comparisons were made among those with recent CPR training (≤2 years) versus no recent (>2 years) or prior CPR training.RESULTS:We recruited 51 research participants between September 2019 and March 2020. The median age was 34 (Q1–Q3, 23–54) years, 56.9% were female, and 41.2% had recent CPR training. The median time from 9-1-1 call to initiation of CPR was 1:19 (Q1–Q3, 1:06–1:26) minutes. A median time of 1:59 (Q1–Q3, 01:50–02:20) minutes was needed to retrieve a drone-delivered AED and deliver a shock. The median CPR compression rate was 115 (Q1–Q3, 109–124) beats per minute, the correct compression depth percentage was 92% (Q1–Q3, 25–98), and the chest compression fraction was 46.7% (Q1–Q3, 39.9%–50.6%). Recent CPR training was not associated with CPR quality or time from 9-1-1 call to AED shock. Younger age (per 10-year increase; β, 9.97 [95% CI, 4.63–15.31] s; P<0.001) and prior experience with AED (β, −30.0 [95% CI, −50.1 to −10.0] s; P=0.004) were associated with more rapid time from 9-1-1 call to AED shock. Prior AED use (β, 6.71 [95% CI, 1.62–11.79]; P=0.011) was associated with improved chest compression fraction percentage.CONCLUSION:Research participants were able to rapidly retrieve an AED from a drone while largely maintaining CPR quality according to American Heart Association guidelines. Chest compression fraction was lower than expected.

中文翻译：

---

将无人机技术纳入 OHCA 的生存链：估计旁观者治疗 OHCA 所需的时间和心肺复苏表现

背景：无人机提供的自动体外除颤器（AED）有望治疗院外心脏骤停。我们的目标是估计使用无人机提供的 AED 进行复苏所需的时间并测量心肺复苏 (CPR) 质量。方法：模拟院外心脏骤停模拟，包括 9-1-1 呼叫、CPR、并进行了无人机递送的 AED。每次模拟都进行了计时并进行了视频记录。心肺复苏表现指标由挪度复苏安妮质量反馈系统记录。多变量回归模型检查了与从 9-1-1 呼叫到 AED 电击和心肺复苏质量指标（按压率、深度、反冲力和胸外按压分数）的时间相关的因素。对最近接受过 CPR 培训（≤ 2 年）的人与最近没有接受过 CPR 培训（> 2 年）或之前没有 CPR 培训的人进行了比较。结果：我们在 2019 年 9 月至 2020 年 3 月期间招募了 51 名研究参与者。中位年龄为 34 岁（第 1 季度到第 3 季度） ，23-54）岁，56.9% 为女性，41.2% 最近接受过心肺复苏培训。从 9-1-1 呼叫到开始心肺复苏的中位时间为 1:19（Q1–Q3，1:06–1:26）分钟。取回无人机递送的 AED 并进行电击所需的中位时间为 1:59（第一季度至第三季度，01:50–02:20）分钟。中位 CPR 按压频率为每分钟 115 次（Q1–Q3，109–124）次，正确按压深度百分比为 92%（Q1–Q3，25–98），胸部按压分数为 46.7%（Q1–Q3） , 39.9%–50.6%)。最近的心肺复苏训练与心肺复苏质量或从 9-1-1 呼叫到 AED 电击的时间无关。年龄较小（每增加 10 年；β，9.97 [95% CI，4.63–15.31] s；P <0.001）和既往 AED 经验（β，−30.0 [95% CI，−50.1 至 −10.0] s；P = 0.004）与从 9-1-1 呼叫到 AED 电击的更快时间相关。既往使用 AED（β，6.71 [95% CI，1.62–11.79]；P = 0.011）与改善胸部按压分数百分比相关。结论：研究参与者能够从无人机中快速检索 AED，同时在很大程度上保持 CPR 质量符合美国心脏协会指南。胸外按压分数低于预期。