Bystander automated external defibrillator use and clinical outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Resuscitation · 2017-09-06 · Meta-analysis
Abstract
AIM: To systematically review studies comparing bystander automated external defibrillator (AED) use to no AED use in regard to clinical outcomes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), and to provide a descriptive summary of studies on the cost-effectiveness of bystander AED use. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, the Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for randomized trials and observational studies published before June 1, 2017. Meta-analyses were performed for patients with all rhythms, shockable rhythms, and non-shockable rhythms. RESULTS: Forty-four observational studies, 3 randomized trials, and 13 cost-effectiveness studies were included. Meta-analysis of 6 observational studies without critical risk of bias showed that bystander AED use was associated with survival to hospital discharge (all rhythms OR: 1.73 [95%CI: 1.36, 2.18], shockable rhythms OR: 1.66 [95%CI: 1.54, 1.79]) and favorable neurological outcome (all rhythms OR: 2.12 [95%CI: 1.36, 3.29], shockable rhythms OR: 2.37 [95%CI: 1.58, 3.57]). There was no association between bystander AED use and neurological outcome for non-shockable rhythms (OR: 0.76 [95%CI: 0.10, 5.87]). The Public-Access Defibrillation trial found higher survival rates when volunteers were equipped with AEDs. The other trials found no survival difference, although their study settings differed. The quality of evidence was low for randomized trials and very low for observational studies. AEDs were cost-effective in settings with high cardiac arrest incidence, with most studies reporting ratios < $100,000 per quality-adjusted life years. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence supports the association between bystander AED use and improved clinical outcomes, although the quality of evidence was low to very low.
Abstract © the authors or publisher, via PubMed. Reuse and removal
Tags
Automated external defibrillator · Bystanders · Mortality & survival · Quality of life & function
Related articles
- Survival outcome among patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (Eur J Med Res, 2023)
- Comparison of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests during the COVID-19 pandemic with those before the pandemic: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. (Front Public Health, 2023)
- Dispatching citizens as first responders to out-of-hospital cardiac arrests: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (Eur J Emerg Med, 2022)
- Cardiac Arrest Care on United States Golf Courses-Up to Par Yet? (J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open, 2026)
- Population-level impact of universal early AED implementation on out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes: a machine learning analysis using synthetic patient data of 45-year projection study from Japan. (Resuscitation, 2025)
- Bystander placement of automated external defibrillators and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest outcomes: a propensity score-matched cohort study between 2021 and 2022. (Intern Emerg Med, 2026)