PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Mary Fran Hazinski

Publications and source records attributed to Mary Fran Hazinski.

14 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Community lay rescuer automated external defibrillation programs: key state legislative components and implementation strategies: a summary of a decade of experience for healthcare providers, policymakers, legislators, employers, and community leaders from the American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and Office of State Advocacy.

Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of death for adults > or =40 years of age. The American Heart Association (AHA) estimates that sudden cardiac arrest is responsible for about 250,000 out-of-hospital deaths annually in the United States. Since the early 1990s, the AHA has called for innovative approaches to reduce time to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and defibrillation and improve survival from sudden cardiac arrest. In the mid-1990s, the AHA launched a public health initiative to promote early CPR and early use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) by trained lay responders in community (lay rescuer) AED programs. Between 1995 and 2000, all 50 states passed laws and regulations concerning lay rescuer AED programs. In addition, the Cardiac Arrest Survival Act (CASA, Public Law 106-505) was passed and signed into federal law in 2000. The variations in state and federal legislation and regulations have complicated efforts to promote lay rescuer AED programs and in some cases have created impediments to such programs. Since 2000, most states have reexamined lay rescuer AED statutes, and many have passed legislation to remove impediments and encourage the development of lay rescuer AED programs. The purpose of this statement is to help policymakers develop new legislation or revise existing legislation to remove barriers to effective community lay rescuer AED programs. Important areas that should be considered in state legislation and regulations are highlighted, and sample legislation sections are included. Potential sources of controversy and the rationale for proposed legislative components are noted. This statement will not address legislation to support home AED programs. Such recommendations may be made after the conclusion of a large study of home AED use.

American Heart Association↗
PubMed2004

Lay rescuer automated external defibrillator programs for children and adolescents.

This article summarizes the controversies regarding the establishment of lay rescuer automated external defibrillator (AED) programs in schools. It describes the elements of one successful program and provides recommendations for critical elements of AED programs in schools, using the recommendations that were described by the American Heart Association statement and experience gained in the establishment of AED programs in high schools in Wisconsin.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Sudden death in children and adolescents.

This article focuses on sudden unexpected cardiac death (SCD) in children and adolescents. The authors discuss the epidemiology of SCD in children and adolescents, its incidence and etiologies, and strategies for prevention. Because most of the episodes of SCD or sudden cardiac arrest in children and adolescents occur in asymptomatic individuals unknown to have an underlying abnormality before their "event," the issues in this article primarily focus on this group of individuals.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2003

Specificity and sensitivity of automated external defibrillator rhythm analysis in infants and children.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The rhythm detection algorithms of automated external defibrillators have been derived from adult rhythms, and their ability to discriminate between shockable and nonshockable rhythms in children is largely unknown. This study evaluates the performance of 1 automated external defibrillator algorithm in infants and children and evaluates algorithm performance with anterior-posterior versus sternal-apex lead placement. METHODS: We enrolled pediatric patients in a critical care unit, an electrophysiology laboratory, and a cardiac operating room. A monitor-defibrillator recorded ECGs by means of standard defibrillation-monitor pads. Selected 15-second rhythm samples were played into a LIFEPAK 500 automated external defibrillator, and the automated external defibrillator "shock/no shock" decision was documented. To determine sensitivity and specificity, the automated external defibrillator decision was compared with the "shockable" versus "nonshockable" rhythm classification provided by 3 expert clinicians who were blinded to the automated external defibrillator decision. RESULTS: We recorded 1,561 rhythm samples from 203 pediatric patients (median age 11 months; range, day of birth to 7 years). The automated external defibrillator recommended a shock for 72 of 73 rhythm samples classified as coarse ventricular fibrillation by expert review (sensitivity 99%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 93% to 100%); and correctly reached a "no shock advised" decision for 1,465 of 1,472 rhythm samples classified as nonshockable by experts (specificity 99.5%). Specificity was 99.1% (95% CI 97.8% to 99.8%) with the sternal-apex lead and 99.4% (95% CI 98.1% to 99.9%) with the anterior-posterior lead. CONCLUSION: This automated external defibrillator algorithm has high specificity and sensitivity when used in infants and children with either sternal-apex or anterior-posterior lead placement.

Age Factors↗