http://www.iosh.co.uk/ne...ises_defib_concerns.aspx A very interesting article!

essentially "dead" if they don't receive treatment quickly Isn't this the whole point of the campaign? A defibrillator can, if used quickly, save a live. Let's not quibble over phraseology lets just get the message out there, loud and clear.

I couldnt agree with your more, all our first aiders went through de-fib training this month, the instructor has told them that they need to shave the area before carrying out the de-fib procedure? Seems a little strange to me, surely your main aim is to start the heart asap, not make sure the person is clean shaven.. Also the first aiders have to be refresher trained every 12 months too even though the de-fib unit talks the user through step by step on how to operate it..

I was also taught that shaving is necessary only for an unusually hairy person. And the value of an annual refresher isn't in following the recorded instructions or the use of the defibrillator in isolation - it's in practising the whole sequence of actions in the scenario of encountering an unconscious person, including getting help, checking breathing and giving CPR as well as operating the defibrillator.

What I find interesting in relation to Defibrillators is that the British Resuscitation Council state trainign to be an advantage and should people untrained should not be discouraged from using a defib. However the draft ACOP for first aid states persons expected to use a defib 'should' be trained/ Although not mandatory I wonder how many organisations try and implement this as a rule over fear of an inspector finding them to not have sufficient provision.

Once a AED (Defib Machine) has been connected to a casualty it is as idiot proof as you can get. The requirement for training is because it is at work! When using an AED time is critical, you do not have time to get the shaving gel and hot flannel out - if the casualty has a very hairy chest, shave the area where the pads go to get a good connection with the pad, if they have clothing in the way cut it off and let the machine talk you through the whole process, it will tell you if you have a good connection or not, it will also decide if a shock is required and will tell you if your chest compressions are effective or not. As explained by a previous post above, these people are dead and you are trying to bring them back to life! The last thing you should be worrying about is to shave or not to shave or preserving someones modesty! Clive

I recently saw a defib' in an office with the sign "Emergency use only". Errrr....as opposed to some sort of leisure use??

One minute. Now, where are my 'specs to read the instructions...now how do I get this thing out of the bag...oh yes...mmmmm

Oh yes....rin now, where is that instruction for setting the default language...hmmm...mandarin chinese.....that would be "N".....

I had an instructive session on this yesterday. Guidance at http://www.resus.org.uk/pages/aed.pdf Suggests that "short video/computer self-instruction" with hands-on practice with minimal or no instructor input can be as effective as instructor led training. Also suggests that shaving should only be done if chest hair excessive and that use should not be delayed in the absence of a razor.

Peter - good point to refer to the Resus Council Guidance. See also my article in this month's SHP journal : http://www.shponline.co....are-arrested-development Particularly the last paragraph (just before the “panels”) which quotes the Resus Council “An AED can be used safely and effectively without previous training. Therefore, the use of an AED should NOT be restricted to trained rescuers”. Obviously, in premises where there are AEDs, it is eminent good sense that first aiders (and possibly some others too) should be trained in their use. I accept that the HSE’s Approved Code of Practice for First Aid (L.74) states “Where an employer decides to provide a defibrillator in the workplace, it is important that those who may use it are appropriately trained”. However, this is only general advice under “Guidance” not “ACOP”. It does not, therefore, carry the same legal compulsion as ACOP. Indeed, in the final page of L.74 the HSE go on to refer you on to the Resuscitation Council for advice on training for AEDs – so by implication the HSE see the Resus Council as a higher authority on AED training and must therefore accept the quote I made in the preceding paragraph. It should be realised that because AEDs are so simple to use, usually with spoken instructions which “talk you through it”, the most important part of the training is arguably not so much about the actual deployment of the AED itself (which obviously does have to be covered), but how to recognise the symptoms of someone having a heart attack, realising that this may lead to cardiac arrest and fetching the AED to the scene, just in case this happens. From that moment on, the “clock is ticking” and if the device is already beside the casualty, it can be deployed within a minute or two – and maximize their chances of their survival. I have seen other posts in the IOSH forums which refer to PUWER and “therefore only trained people may be allowed to use them”. I have even seen one post (below) which, on the face of it, appears to say that if a person collapses and there doesn’t happen to be a trained person around, then leave the potentially life-saving AED in its cradle and watch the person die!! (Apologies to the contributor if I misunderstand or misinterpret his post…) Yes, AEDs are “Work Equipment” like anything else, and Regulation 9 requires employees to be given “Adequate Training”. However, in the PUWER ACOP (L.22), HSE state that “adequate training” cannot be defined in that document, because training requirements will vary so much from one type of equipment to another. Ultimately it is up to the employer to decide (and for a Court to judge whether they were right). My view is that if the employer makes a decision on training for AEDs based on the recommendations of the Resuscitation Council UK, trains first aiders, but allows (and even encourages) untrained staff to use an AED under circumstances where a trained person is not available, they will have a defensible position in any legal proceedings which may follow. If it comes to a controversy about the First Aid and PUWER ACOPs versus the Resuscitation Council’s Guidance I’ll wager that it will be the latter which will “win the day”. As I say in my article, some discussion with the Organisation’s insurers would be advisable when formulating policy on this. Finally, if anyone reading this is thinking of going out and buying an AED, just be aware that you could save a packet of money by participating in a collaborative purchase scheme I’m setting up. By lots of people getting together to apply “collective purchasing power” the scheme aims to achieve major discounts compared with someone just buying one or two on their own. At time of posting this message I have already received “expressions of interest” for 50 AEDs (and that’s just within the first week since the scheme launched!!). This is certainly focusing the attention of AED suppliers! For details of the scheme go to the following link: http://www.sohsa.co.uk/a...files/defibrillators.pdf Please circulate details of the scheme to anyone you know who you think might benefit. David Osborn