Instapundit talks about portable defibrillators and a recent Popular Mechanics story:

There’s an article in the latest Popular Mechanics — not on their website yet — saying that the home defibrillators really do save lives. As they get cheaper and more ubiquitous, it’s likely to make a real difference. A lot more people die from sudden cardiac death, where a defibrillator will save them but nothing else much will, than is generally realized. Likewise, inexpensive blood pressure monitors mean that — since you don’t have to go to a doctor — more people will track their blood pressure. Just another way technology is empowering ordinary people.

I wrote about this awhile back, looking at the data showing a minimal survival benefit. For some, that may be worth the $1,295:

To put that in perspective, in a low-incidence practice (which would still have a higher incidence of sudden death than an average home), over 1900 AEDs (automatic defibrillators) would have to be purchased to treat 16 cardiac arrests over a 7 year period.

Despite any form of advertising, the prognosis of sudden cardiac death is quite poor, whether a defibrillator is available publicly or not. A retrospective study suggested that targeted public placement of AEDs increased overall survival rate from a cardiac arrest from 5.0 to 6.3 percent.

Certainly some may view any increase in survival rate to be worth $2000. However, before rushing out and buying an AED, consider the evidence. While I applaud continued public use of AEDs, I don’t think it’s an essential part of the well-equipped home yet. AEDs have got a ways to go before it can be compared with fire extinguishers, seat belts, and air bags.

Prev
Next