title: Human factors impact successful lay person automated external defibrillator use during simulated cardiac arrest.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  With the dissemination of automated external defibrillators in the community, there is increasing lay person use, along with less formal automated external defibrillator training and retraining. Therefore, the "ease of use" factors related to the human-device interface may be vital for successful use. We sought to determine whether human factor differences would result in differences in parameters of successful or safe use by lay persons in the setting of simulated cardiac arrest.
  
  
  METHODS
  We measured parameters of successful and safe use with two automated external defibrillator devices among two groups of volunteers, those trained with a brief video tape and those without any training (completely naive). Both devices (the Philips FR2 or the HS1) are used in public access defibrillator settings. Volunteers entered a mock cardiac arrest scenario after randomization to either the naive (untrained) group or to a video-trained group.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Both the FR2 and HS1 were found to be completely safe when used by video-trained and by naive groups of participants, with no adverse events observed (total, n = 256). For both devices, video-trained participants demonstrated high rates of successful defibrillation in the simulated testing (86% for FR2 and 89% for HS1). With the FR2, video-trained participants were significantly more successful compared with naive, untrained participants (86% vs. 48% successful use; p < .001). However, for the HS1, there was no significant difference in success rates for the video-trained vs. naive, untrained groups (89% vs. 87%; p = .79).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Both devices are safe with either video-trained or naive users. The successful use of each device is high when participants view the training videotape designed for the device. An important difference in successful use was observed for naive users where the HS1 showed improved successful use compared with the FR2. Because defibrillation in the community may increasingly be attempted by lay persons whose training is remote or who have not been trained at all, the "naive" scenario may be increasingly relevant to automated external defibrillator use. Collectively, these data support the notion that human factors associated with ease of use may play a critical factor in survival rates achieved by specific devices.
authors.affiliation: University of Chicago, Section of Emergency Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.
authors.forename: Sonia
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Callejas
authors.forename: Anne
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Barry
authors.forename: Ellen
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Demertsidis
authors.forename: Dawn
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Jorgenson
authors.forename: Lance B
authors.initials: LB
authors.lastname: Becker
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D016887:Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation / Q000193:education*; D004554:Electric Countershock / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006323:Heart Arrest / Q000628:therapy*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008348:Manikins