Posted By Gerry Knowles The last company I work for had a corporate policy to supply defibs on all of its plants. We put a policy in place and did the training with all of the first aiders. We then did a piece of training which explained how the defib worked and how and when it would be used and the benefits. We also stressed that the machine had a massive number of fail safes on it. The result was a workforce who was suspicious realised that it could save lives and welcomed it. So I would suggest a lot of communication. I hope that this helps. Gerry

Posted By Peter Longworth If your heart had stopped or in fibrillation would you be conscious and able to express apreference?

Posted By Laurie Bigger issue here I think. Can an employee refuse first aid treatment (for that is all that this is when reduced to basics) from a trained first aider provided by the employer? I don't know the answer, I'm just posing the question Laurie

Posted By Andrew Perrett Shaun, AEDs are Automated External Difribrillators, the fact that they are automated and hence fail to safe should be a major selling point to the staff. The automation significantly reduces (but doesn't negate) any scope for operator error. 'Samaritan Law' is a Canadian concept. UK Common law provides that if a person has an honestly held belief that another is in iminent danger, that person may use such force is reasonable to avert that danger. i.e. if a first aider believes that a person is suffering a heart attack, comman law would provide a clear defence against an assault allegation, if the first aider acted in accordance with their training in an attempt to provide care for the casualty, whether that be by way of CPR or an AED. As for the question of a First Aider Standing by and not providing assistance. My money would be on the idea that a First Aider does not have a legal duty of care in these circumstances and hence would not be found to be legally negligent. Whilst I hate to take the theme off into a completely new direction, I suggest that this is more about quality of training. Your informal training evaluation suggests that whilst you may have paid for AED skills, the transference of those (AED) skills to the workplace is clearly a problem, and if there is such a ground swell of resistance the time and money invested in this training is not achieving the best results that you deserve. Before you undertake any training, undergo a training needs analysis process, define that training and evaluate the training after delivery, (preferably after a pilot course). That process should have identified the awareness training that your staff require. Training AEDs are cheap and good demonstrative tools for this purpose. Hope this helps Andrew Perrett

Posted By Richard Mathews We have AEDs on two of our sites and they have been used to save a life. The paramedics and the doctors at the hospital all agreed that if it wasn’t for the AED being used the casualty would not have survived. I would first explain the facts to the workers. The chances of surviving a cardiac arrest are about 80% if the AED is used within the first 2 minutes. The chance drops by about 10% for every minute after that, do the sums it isn’t difficult, by the time a 999 call has been made (about 2 mins) you are already eating into critical time. At best you can expect the ambulance to take about 5 mins. You are now down to a 30% chance of survival. The ambulance gets to site and depending on the layout of the site and the direction they approach it can be another 2 – 3 mins. before they reach the casualty. Oops! Times up! You are already praying for miracles. The other question I would ask is: If they wont allow the first aiders to use a foolproof AED would they also refuse CPR? That would cut their chance of survival to somewhere below the chance of winning the lottery if they don’t buy a ticket. But I wouldn’t worry. If someone has a cardiac arrest, ask them then if they want the AED. I’ll guarantee they’ll beg for it! Richard