[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Citations 0
June 28, 2006

Benefits vs the Harms of Automated External Defibrillator Use—Reply

Author Affiliations

Letters Section Editor: Robert M. Golub, MD, Senior Editor.

JAMA. 2006;295(24):2849-2850. doi:10.1001/jama.295.24.2850

In Reply: Drs Landau, Jaffe, and Wentzel note that “accurate measures of memory, mental capacity, depression, personality, independent living skills, or even proof of complete recovery in the very best survivors” is needed and that “these data are essential to the ethical premise upon which public-access defibrillation is based”. Considerable data are available regarding the neurologic outcomes in survivors of sudden cardiac arrest, as included in references 5 to 11 in our Commentary. In another study of 18 patients with witnessed cardiac arrest and ventricular fibrillation, AED use resulted in a rate of long-term survival with a good neurologic outcome of 10/18 (56%), which improved to 12/18 (67%) among patients in whom defibrillation was delivered within 5 minutes.1