 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
== "CPR Adult Courses". link 404 == (could not edit the section to reflect this)
The sections "Usage", "Mechanism of Operation" and "Simplicity of use" restate material. Some of what is in Mechanism... is clearly actually about usage. I've copied these sections to User:Nobull67/Draft/AED and will attempt a clean-up. Brian McCauley ( talk) 11:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- Many AED units have an 'event memory' which store the ECG of the patient along with details of the time the unit was activated and the number and strength of any shocks delivered. Some units also have voice recording abilities[citation needed] to monitor the actions taken by the personnel in order to ascertain if these had any impact on the survival outcome. All this recorded data can be either downloaded to a computer or printed out so that the providing organisation or responsible body is able to see the effectiveness of both CPR and defibrillation.
Contains a lot of padding words and could be much simplified to
- Many AED units have an 'event memory' which stores the ECG along with the time the unit was activated and the number and strength of shocks. Some units have sound recording abilities citation needed to monitor the actions of personnel. All this data can be used to assess the effectiveness of both CPR and defibrillation.
This article is an occasional target for linkspam and vandalism. Please help me and Wikipedia by adding it to your watchlist and monitor it for anything inappropriate. Thanks! GeeCee 18:11, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
I have just deleted a large chunk of copyvio material taken from the Resuscitation Council UK ( www.resus.org.uk). Someone who knows the legal situation better than I do should, however, put up a summary of legal liability outside the USA. Gnusmas 19:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Given the continued vandalism by commercial organisations to this page, does anyone know how we can request the page be blocked for editing by unregistered and newly registered users? I think it would be well worth doing here. Owain.davies 05:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- I requested it once but apparently the frequency of vandalism is not high enough to justify semi-protection. GeeCee 05:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, there are at least the three of us watching it. I left warning messages on the talk pages of the last two vandals.--
killing sparrows
(chirp!) 05:42, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
-
WP:RFP is the proper page for requesting protection. You might want to give it a shot now that we've had this last batch of vandalism on the article but compared to other articles getting semi-protection, this article is fairly low traffic.
GeeCee 05:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Make that at least four people now ;). I could be entirely wrong, but looking through the history it doesn't strike me that the frequency of vandalism is too great. I suppose I'll see for myself by keeping this article watched.
TheIslander 23:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- It would be a shame if the editing of this page was blocked due to vandalism. Might I suggest that as long as the people 'watching' this page feel able to cope that the page be left unblocked. JinHeinz 15:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Make that at least four people now ;). I could be entirely wrong, but looking through the history it doesn't strike me that the frequency of vandalism is too great. I suppose I'll see for myself by keeping this article watched.
TheIslander 23:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
-
WP:RFP is the proper page for requesting protection. You might want to give it a shot now that we've had this last batch of vandalism on the article but compared to other articles getting semi-protection, this article is fairly low traffic.
GeeCee 05:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, there are at least the three of us watching it. I left warning messages on the talk pages of the last two vandals.--
killing sparrows
(chirp!) 05:42, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
St. John Ambulance protocols now state that the lower pad is placed vertically, not horizontally, i.e. pointing the shoulder as opposed to accross the chest. I will try and find a source - if I find it, I'll remove the picture again. TheIslander 13:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- No problem, i'll do some research as well. I'm not sure if its just the pad being rotated that we should remove the picture until we have a better one. If you find a source, post it here on the talk page, and i'll see if i can't rustle up a picture to match, rather than leaving it without. sound good? Owain.davies 14:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Take a look at page 9 of this document: http://member.sja.org.uk/downloads/training/FAprotocolchanges.pdf - that's how I was taught recently, and I was told that protocals had indeed recently changed to that. I'll see if I can find anything better ;) TheIslander 15:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- I see what you mean, but in honesty, the pad being straight or sideways will make no practical difference to the delivery of the shock (notice where it tells you that if you make a mistake, not to correct it). I think the diagram should stand until we can locate a free use image showing it in the new style. Owain.davies 16:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I assumed that, if I had been taught that this was how the pad should be placed, and actually taught that it had been done differently until recently, then it was probably important. To be frank, I'm not sure of the difference myself, but just want the article to be as accurate as possible. I'll see if I can find a better free use image, but I agree now that the picture there can probably stand until and if one is found. Cheers ;) TheIslander 18:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- The Resuscitation Council (UK) in
The use of Automated External Defibrillators (2005) also states the mid-axillary pad should be oriented vertically. The Council are, presumably, the source of the SJA policy. The document cites Deakin, CD (January 2003).
"Is the orientation of the apical defibrillation paddle of importance during manual external defibrillation?". Resuscitation. 56 (1): 15–18. Retrieved 2008-11-09.
{{ cite journal}}: Unknown parameter|coauthors=ignored (|author=suggested) ( help) ( Abstract Retrieved on 9 November 2008). As a matter of personal opinion use of the "horizontal/vertical" terminology (both by the Resuscitation Council and Deakin et al) is confusing when the patient is recumbent as they generally are during resuscitation. Brian McCauley ( talk) 09:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- The Resuscitation Council (UK) in
The use of Automated External Defibrillators (2005) also states the mid-axillary pad should be oriented vertically. The Council are, presumably, the source of the SJA policy. The document cites Deakin, CD (January 2003).
"Is the orientation of the apical defibrillation paddle of importance during manual external defibrillation?". Resuscitation. 56 (1): 15–18. Retrieved 2008-11-09.
User:SafteyNet, the text that you keep adding does not seem appropriate to this article. The text a) looks like it has been copied and pasted from elsewhere, b) is very Canada-specific - most of that info is already elsewhere in the article, and c) looks as though it's just been dropped in - please carefully incorperate new additions to existing material. Please state the reasons why you believe the info you're adding to be important to include. TheIslander 18:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Redirected link for nitrile gloves from the functional group -CN to nitrile rubber. 66.105.208.42 19:28, 24 June 2006 (UTC)Tom
This IEEE Spectrum article should be a good source for helping with filling in some new content. However, it may not help with the ~3-4 areas that are marked with 'citation needed'. Wish I had time to help edit it myself. - Donjrude ( talk) 21:27, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
At the beginning of the Section Placement and Availability, what is this supposed to mean?
The topic is particularly hard to spell out correctly, so people are more likely to search for "AED" and be directed first to the dab page AED. Furthermore, the abbreviation universally refers to this specific device; should we just make AED redirect here directly and move the dab page appropriately? <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> ( talk) 12:36, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Automated external defibrillator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added
{{ dead link}}tag to http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/aed.htm - Added
{{ dead link}}tag to http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/aed.htm - Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160205131837/http://www.scopemedicalsupply.com/medical-diagnostic-instruments/cardiology-equipment/aed-defib-accessories.html to http://www.scopemedicalsupply.com/medical-diagnostic-instruments/cardiology-equipment/aed-defib-accessories.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:03, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
The asystolic patient only has a chance of survival if, through a combination of CPR and cardiac stimulant drugs, one of the shockable rhythms can be established, which makes it imperative for CPR to be carried out prior to the arrival of a defibrillator. 47.140.183.186 ( talk) 21:38, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
The lead section seems to be loaded with overly technical medical jargon. An adult with an average amount of exposure to the medical industry should be able to easily and readily understand the entire lead section, or at least most of it so that he/she has enough context to understand the more difficult words. I think the lead section should be completely rewritten so that laypeople can easily comprehend it. What does everyone think? Mrbeastmodeallday ( talk) 05:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: There is no consensus to abbreviate the defibrillator article and no consensus on whether AED should be a primary redirect. Status quo remains in place. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 11:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
– Automated external defibrillator is the primary topic for the search term “AED” Mrbeastmodeallday ( talk) 04:07, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
- I would support making AED a redirect to Automated external defibrillator, but I oppose moving to the initialism since spelling it out is more helpful to readers. – Þjarkur (talk) 11:02, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - I have a high threshold for replacing TLAs at primary, and this doesn't meet it considering how many alternatives there are on the DAB page. Keeping most articles at titles that match their non-acronym form is excellent WP:NATURALDISAMBIGUATION. -- Netoholic @ 11:36, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 14:07, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
- B-Class Physiology articles
- Mid-importance Physiology articles
- Physiology articles about an unassessed area
- WikiProject Physiology articles
- B-Class medicine articles
- High-importance medicine articles
- B-Class emergency medicine and EMS articles
- Top-importance emergency medicine and EMS articles
- Emergency medicine and EMS task force articles
- All WikiProject Medicine articles
|
| This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
== "CPR Adult Courses". link 404 == (could not edit the section to reflect this)
The sections "Usage", "Mechanism of Operation" and "Simplicity of use" restate material. Some of what is in Mechanism... is clearly actually about usage. I've copied these sections to User:Nobull67/Draft/AED and will attempt a clean-up. Brian McCauley ( talk) 11:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- Many AED units have an 'event memory' which store the ECG of the patient along with details of the time the unit was activated and the number and strength of any shocks delivered. Some units also have voice recording abilities[citation needed] to monitor the actions taken by the personnel in order to ascertain if these had any impact on the survival outcome. All this recorded data can be either downloaded to a computer or printed out so that the providing organisation or responsible body is able to see the effectiveness of both CPR and defibrillation.
Contains a lot of padding words and could be much simplified to
- Many AED units have an 'event memory' which stores the ECG along with the time the unit was activated and the number and strength of shocks. Some units have sound recording abilities citation needed to monitor the actions of personnel. All this data can be used to assess the effectiveness of both CPR and defibrillation.
This article is an occasional target for linkspam and vandalism. Please help me and Wikipedia by adding it to your watchlist and monitor it for anything inappropriate. Thanks! GeeCee 18:11, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
I have just deleted a large chunk of copyvio material taken from the Resuscitation Council UK ( www.resus.org.uk). Someone who knows the legal situation better than I do should, however, put up a summary of legal liability outside the USA. Gnusmas 19:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Given the continued vandalism by commercial organisations to this page, does anyone know how we can request the page be blocked for editing by unregistered and newly registered users? I think it would be well worth doing here. Owain.davies 05:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- I requested it once but apparently the frequency of vandalism is not high enough to justify semi-protection. GeeCee 05:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, there are at least the three of us watching it. I left warning messages on the talk pages of the last two vandals.--
killing sparrows
(chirp!) 05:42, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
-
WP:RFP is the proper page for requesting protection. You might want to give it a shot now that we've had this last batch of vandalism on the article but compared to other articles getting semi-protection, this article is fairly low traffic.
GeeCee 05:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Make that at least four people now ;). I could be entirely wrong, but looking through the history it doesn't strike me that the frequency of vandalism is too great. I suppose I'll see for myself by keeping this article watched.
TheIslander 23:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- It would be a shame if the editing of this page was blocked due to vandalism. Might I suggest that as long as the people 'watching' this page feel able to cope that the page be left unblocked. JinHeinz 15:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Make that at least four people now ;). I could be entirely wrong, but looking through the history it doesn't strike me that the frequency of vandalism is too great. I suppose I'll see for myself by keeping this article watched.
TheIslander 23:46, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
-
WP:RFP is the proper page for requesting protection. You might want to give it a shot now that we've had this last batch of vandalism on the article but compared to other articles getting semi-protection, this article is fairly low traffic.
GeeCee 05:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, there are at least the three of us watching it. I left warning messages on the talk pages of the last two vandals.--
killing sparrows
(chirp!) 05:42, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
St. John Ambulance protocols now state that the lower pad is placed vertically, not horizontally, i.e. pointing the shoulder as opposed to accross the chest. I will try and find a source - if I find it, I'll remove the picture again. TheIslander 13:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- No problem, i'll do some research as well. I'm not sure if its just the pad being rotated that we should remove the picture until we have a better one. If you find a source, post it here on the talk page, and i'll see if i can't rustle up a picture to match, rather than leaving it without. sound good? Owain.davies 14:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Take a look at page 9 of this document: http://member.sja.org.uk/downloads/training/FAprotocolchanges.pdf - that's how I was taught recently, and I was told that protocals had indeed recently changed to that. I'll see if I can find anything better ;) TheIslander 15:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- I see what you mean, but in honesty, the pad being straight or sideways will make no practical difference to the delivery of the shock (notice where it tells you that if you make a mistake, not to correct it). I think the diagram should stand until we can locate a free use image showing it in the new style. Owain.davies 16:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I assumed that, if I had been taught that this was how the pad should be placed, and actually taught that it had been done differently until recently, then it was probably important. To be frank, I'm not sure of the difference myself, but just want the article to be as accurate as possible. I'll see if I can find a better free use image, but I agree now that the picture there can probably stand until and if one is found. Cheers ;) TheIslander 18:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- The Resuscitation Council (UK) in
The use of Automated External Defibrillators (2005) also states the mid-axillary pad should be oriented vertically. The Council are, presumably, the source of the SJA policy. The document cites Deakin, CD (January 2003).
"Is the orientation of the apical defibrillation paddle of importance during manual external defibrillation?". Resuscitation. 56 (1): 15–18. Retrieved 2008-11-09.
{{ cite journal}}: Unknown parameter|coauthors=ignored (|author=suggested) ( help) ( Abstract Retrieved on 9 November 2008). As a matter of personal opinion use of the "horizontal/vertical" terminology (both by the Resuscitation Council and Deakin et al) is confusing when the patient is recumbent as they generally are during resuscitation. Brian McCauley ( talk) 09:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- The Resuscitation Council (UK) in
The use of Automated External Defibrillators (2005) also states the mid-axillary pad should be oriented vertically. The Council are, presumably, the source of the SJA policy. The document cites Deakin, CD (January 2003).
"Is the orientation of the apical defibrillation paddle of importance during manual external defibrillation?". Resuscitation. 56 (1): 15–18. Retrieved 2008-11-09.
User:SafteyNet, the text that you keep adding does not seem appropriate to this article. The text a) looks like it has been copied and pasted from elsewhere, b) is very Canada-specific - most of that info is already elsewhere in the article, and c) looks as though it's just been dropped in - please carefully incorperate new additions to existing material. Please state the reasons why you believe the info you're adding to be important to include. TheIslander 18:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Redirected link for nitrile gloves from the functional group -CN to nitrile rubber. 66.105.208.42 19:28, 24 June 2006 (UTC)Tom
This IEEE Spectrum article should be a good source for helping with filling in some new content. However, it may not help with the ~3-4 areas that are marked with 'citation needed'. Wish I had time to help edit it myself. - Donjrude ( talk) 21:27, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
At the beginning of the Section Placement and Availability, what is this supposed to mean?
The topic is particularly hard to spell out correctly, so people are more likely to search for "AED" and be directed first to the dab page AED. Furthermore, the abbreviation universally refers to this specific device; should we just make AED redirect here directly and move the dab page appropriately? <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> ( talk) 12:36, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Automated external defibrillator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added
{{ dead link}}tag to http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/aed.htm - Added
{{ dead link}}tag to http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/aed.htm - Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160205131837/http://www.scopemedicalsupply.com/medical-diagnostic-instruments/cardiology-equipment/aed-defib-accessories.html to http://www.scopemedicalsupply.com/medical-diagnostic-instruments/cardiology-equipment/aed-defib-accessories.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:03, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
The asystolic patient only has a chance of survival if, through a combination of CPR and cardiac stimulant drugs, one of the shockable rhythms can be established, which makes it imperative for CPR to be carried out prior to the arrival of a defibrillator. 47.140.183.186 ( talk) 21:38, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
The lead section seems to be loaded with overly technical medical jargon. An adult with an average amount of exposure to the medical industry should be able to easily and readily understand the entire lead section, or at least most of it so that he/she has enough context to understand the more difficult words. I think the lead section should be completely rewritten so that laypeople can easily comprehend it. What does everyone think? Mrbeastmodeallday ( talk) 05:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: There is no consensus to abbreviate the defibrillator article and no consensus on whether AED should be a primary redirect. Status quo remains in place. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 11:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
– Automated external defibrillator is the primary topic for the search term “AED” Mrbeastmodeallday ( talk) 04:07, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
- I would support making AED a redirect to Automated external defibrillator, but I oppose moving to the initialism since spelling it out is more helpful to readers. – Þjarkur (talk) 11:02, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - I have a high threshold for replacing TLAs at primary, and this doesn't meet it considering how many alternatives there are on the DAB page. Keeping most articles at titles that match their non-acronym form is excellent WP:NATURALDISAMBIGUATION. -- Netoholic @ 11:36, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 14:07, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
- B-Class Physiology articles
- Mid-importance Physiology articles
- Physiology articles about an unassessed area
- WikiProject Physiology articles
- B-Class medicine articles
- High-importance medicine articles
- B-Class emergency medicine and EMS articles
- Top-importance emergency medicine and EMS articles
- Emergency medicine and EMS task force articles
- All WikiProject Medicine articles