Posted By Ron Impey There is no mention of defibrillators in the Approved Code of Practice. As remarked in previous postings on this board on this subject, it is down to risk assessment whether additional specialist equipment is necessary. In some circumstances they are a very good idea, but only if there are a sufficient number of first aiders who are competent to use them, they are properly maintained, and the device is of the type which will not operate where that is inappropriate.

Posted By Richard Mathews We have AEDs at two of our sites and on two occasions they have saved the lives of people who would have died had the AEDs not been available. Unless you can guarantee the ambulance getting to you and shocking the casualty within the first 5 minutes and your risk assessment shows a risk of cardiac arrest then you should have AEDs (my opinion). A lot of people are still scared of these things and there is no need to be, if you get the right one. With the type that we have any competent first aider would be able to use one even if they hadn’t had the training, in saying that I’m not advocating that untrained people should use them, I’m just making comment as to how simple they are to use. The main part of the training is really about the safety of the rescuers in not getting them shocked. The most difficult bit about using the AED is getting the box open once you have done that it starts talking to you and tells you what to do and when to do it. There are even pictures on the pads showing where on the body to stick them. Also the maintenance is minimal the batteries are long life guaranteed for 4 years and it tells you when they need replacing. All in all they are as idiot proof as they can be. Don’t forget if you have to use one the casualty is dead so you can’t make things any worse. Richard