ArrhythmiaPhase 3NCT00004560
Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) Community Trial
A Phase 3 study testing defibrillator in people with Arrhythmia and Heart Arrest, run by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI).
Trial summary
To measure survival to hospital discharge of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in community units (e.g., apartment or office buildings, gated communities, sports venues, senior centers, shopping malls) served by trained non-medical responders using automated external defibrillators (AEDs), an approach… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 75 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Arrhythmia, Heart Arrest, Heart Diseases
- What is being tested?
- defibrillator
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- How many people
- Not given
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Sep 1999to Feb 2004
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 75 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
No eligibility criteria
About this study
To measure survival to hospital discharge of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in community units (e.g., apartment or office buildings, gated communities, sports venues, senior centers, shopping malls) served by trained non-medical responders using automated external defibrillators (AEDs), an approach called Public Access Defibrillation, compared to units receiving the traditional optimum community standard of care (i.e., rescuers trained to recognize a cardiac emergency, call 911, and initiate CPR).
Read the detailed description
BACKGROUND:
Sudden out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OOH-CA) remains a significant cause of death, in spite of recent declines in overall mortality from cardiovascular disease. Existing methods of emergency resuscitation are inadequate due to time delays inherent in the transport of a trained responder with defibrillation capabilities to the side of the OOH-CA victim.
Existing Emergency Medical Services (EMS) systems typically combine paramedic Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) services with some level of community involvement, such as bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training. Some communities include automated external defibrillators (AEDs) at isolated sites or in mobile police or fire vehicles. Such an approach typically varies in effectiveness, with an incremental improvement in effectiveness seen in communities that organize and integrate services with the existing EMS system. However, optimal improvement in survival from sudden OOH-CA may require a program that utilizes volunteer non-medical responders (who may not have a traditional duty to respond to an emergency) who are successfully trained to use AEDs. A comprehensive, integrated community approach to treatment with AEDs would have community units served by these volunteer non-medical responders who can quickly identify and treat a patient with OOH-CA. Such an approach is termed Public Access Defibrillation (PAD).
Some observational studies suggest support for the PAD approach. These studies have targeted traditional public safety responders such as police and firefighters or other laypersons in leadership positions who are trained and regularly called upon to take command in an emergency (e.g., airline flight attendants, security officers in Las Vegas casinos). Other studies, both randomized and observational, where trainees have been spouses or family members of at-risk patients, suggest that not all laypersons can effectively utilize AEDs in the setting of OOH-CA, even with extensive training. This study differs from those conducted previously by focusing on an intermediate group, namely, volunteer non-medical responders (e.g., merchants, bank tellers, building superintendents, and co-workers). This study will provide results that may help to develop informed public policy regarding the use of AEDs by volunteer non-medical persons.
DESIGN NARRATIVE:
This was a study of a comprehensive, integrated community approach in which volunteer non-medical responders (lay volunteers without a traditional responsibility to take charge in medical emergencies as their primary job description) were trained to use automated external defibrillators (AEDs). This approach is called Public Access Defibrillation (PAD). The hypothesis investigated was that PAD would significantly increase survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest by reducing the time interval from collapse to defibrillation. The specific aim of this randomized, controlled trial was to measure survival to hospital discharge following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in community units trained and equipped to provide public access defibrillation in addition to optimal standard care, compared to community units trained to provide optimal standard care (recognition of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, 911 access, cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Secondary aims included the comparison using Utstein criteria (Annals of Emergency Medicine 1991;20:861-74), neurological status, quality of life, cost, and cost-effectiveness between the two groups.
Participating research sites identified 1,000 units (e.g., public areas, gated communities, shopping malls, airport terminals, casinos, business parks) within their service area that anticipated at least 0.6 treatable out-of-hospital cardiac arrests within a 15 month period. Each unit was randomized to serve as either an intervention or control group, with comparative episode data collected for a 15 month period following a short preliminary data collection period (approximately 2 months to evaluate the ability for the site to capture event data) after training. Within each site, units were sub-randomized to a retraining strategy. Performance at retraining was monitored, and strategies modified if indicated.
Volunteer non-medical responders (e.g., office staff, bank tellers, merchants, and neighborhood volunteers) in both the intervention and control groups will be trained to provide the optimal standard of care: (a) recognize out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; (b) access 911 or its equivalent; and, (c) administer CPR. Volunteers in the intervention group will also be taught to use an AED promptly while awaiting arrival of the first public safety emergency medical team. The criteria for number and location of trained volunteers and devices will be a maximum 3-minute "walk through" to have the AED at the patient's side.
Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest victims in each of the two groups will be compared over the 15 month intervention period with respect to their: (a) survival to hospital discharge (primary outcome); (b) neurological status; (c) quality of life; and, (d) resource use/costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness of volunteer non-medical responder defibrillation will be calculated.
- Conditions
- Arrhythmia, Heart Arrest, Heart Diseases, Myocardial Infarction, Ventricular Fibrillation, Death, Sudden, Cardiac
- Being tested
- defibrillator
- Medical subject headings
- Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Heart Arrest, Heart Diseases, Myocardial Infarction, Ventricular Fibrillation, Death, Sudden, Cardiac
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
defibrillatorDevice
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted10 Feb 2000 (estimated)
- Study startSep 1999
- Study completionFeb 2004
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (9)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for ArrhythmiaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)The sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
Sponsor and investigators
- Sponsor type
- US National Institutes of Health
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00004560
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 128
- Status last verified
- Nov 2005
- First submitted
- 9 Feb 2000
- Last updated
- 14 Apr 2016
- Results posted
- No
Publications
Ornato JP, McBurnie MA, Nichol G, Salive M, Weisfeldt M, Riegel B, Christenson J, Terndrup T, Daya M; PAD Trial Investigators. The Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) trial: study design and rationale. Resuscitation. 2003 Feb;56(2):135-47. doi: 10.1016/s0300-9572(02)00442-2.
PubMed 12589986Mosesso VN Jr, Brown LH, Greene HL, Schmidt TA, Aufderheide TP, Sayre MR, Stephens SW, Travers A, Craven RA, Weisfeldt ML; PAD Trial Investigators. Conducting research using the emergency exception from informed consent: the Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) Trial experience. Resuscitation. 2004 Apr;61(1):29-36. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2003.11.016.
PubMed 15081178Sayre MR, Travers AH, Daya M, Greene HL, Salive ME, Vijayaraghavan K, Craven RA, Groh WJ, Hallstrom AP; PAD Investigators. Measuring survival rates from sudden cardiac arrest: the elusive definition. Resuscitation. 2004 Jul;62(1):25-34. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2004.02.007.
PubMed 15246580Hallstrom AP, Ornato JP, Weisfeldt M, Travers A, Christenson J, McBurnie MA, Zalenski R, Becker LB, Schron EB, Proschan M; Public Access Defibrillation Trial Investigators. Public-access defibrillation and survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med. 2004 Aug 12;351(7):637-46. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa040566.
PubMed 15306665Nichol G, Wells GA, Kuntz K, Feeny D, Longstreth W, Mahoney B, Mann C, Lucas R, Henry M, Huszti E, Birnbaum A. Methodological design for economic evaluation in Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) trial. Am Heart J. 2005 Aug;150(2):202-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2004.09.034.
PubMed 16086918Powell J, Van Ottingham L, Schron E. Public defibrillation: increased survival from a structured response system. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2004 Nov-Dec;19(6):384-9. doi: 10.1097/00005082-200411000-00009.
PubMed 15529059Richardson LD, Gunnels MD, Groh WJ, Peberdy MA, Pennington S, Wilets I, Campbell V, Van Ottingham L, McBurnie MA; PAD Trial Investigators. Implementation of community-based public access defibrillation in the PAD trial. Acad Emerg Med. 2005 Aug;12(8):688-97. doi: 10.1197/j.aem.2005.03.525.
PubMed 16079421Birnbaum A, McBurnie MA, Powell J, Ottingham LV, Riegel B, Potts J, Hedges JR; PAD Investigators. Modeling instructor preferences for CPR and AED competence estimation. Resuscitation. 2005 Mar;64(3):333-9. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2004.08.019.
PubMed 15733763Riegel B, Birnbaum A, Aufderheide TP, Thode HC Jr, Henry MC, Van Ottingham L, Swor R; PAD Investigators. Predictors of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator skill retention. Am Heart J. 2005 Nov;150(5):927-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2005.01.042.
PubMed 16290965
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 Apr 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) Community Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00004560
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 128
- Conditions
- Arrhythmia, Heart Arrest, Heart Diseases, Myocardial Infarction, Ventricular Fibrillation, Death, Sudden, Cardiac
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Lead sponsor
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)US National Institutes of Health
- Study start
- Sep 1999
- Study completion
- Feb 2004
- First posted
- 10 Feb 2000 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
To measure survival to hospital discharge of patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in community units (e.g., apartment or office buildings, gated communities, sports venues, senior centers, shopping malls) served by trained non-medical responders using automated external defibrillators (AEDs), an approach called Public Access Defibrillation, compared to units receiving the traditional optimum community standard of care (i.e., rescuers trained to recognize a cardiac emergency, call 911, and initiate CPR).
Detailed description
BACKGROUND:
Sudden out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OOH-CA) remains a significant cause of death, in spite of recent declines in overall mortality from cardiovascular disease. Existing methods of emergency resuscitation are inadequate due to time delays inherent in the transport of a trained responder with defibrillation capabilities to the side of the OOH-CA victim.
Existing Emergency Medical Services (EMS) systems typically combine paramedic Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) services with some level of community involvement, such as bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training. Some communities include automated external defibrillators (AEDs) at isolated sites or in mobile police or fire vehicles. Such an approach typically varies in effectiveness, with an incremental improvement in effectiveness seen in communities that organize and integrate services with the existing EMS system. However, optimal improvement in survival from sudden OOH-CA may require a program that utilizes volunteer non-medical responders (who may not have a traditional duty to respond to an emergency) who are successfully trained to use AEDs. A comprehensive, integrated community approach to treatment with AEDs would have community units served by these volunteer non-medical responders who can quickly identify and treat a patient with OOH-CA. Such an approach is termed Public Access Defibrillation (PAD).
Some observational studies suggest support for the PAD approach. These studies have targeted traditional public safety responders such as police and firefighters or other laypersons in leadership positions who are trained and regularly called upon to take command in an emergency (e.g., airline flight attendants, security officers in Las Vegas casinos). Other studies, both randomized and observational, where trainees have been spouses or family members of at-risk patients, suggest that not all laypersons can effectively utilize AEDs in the setting of OOH-CA, even with extensive training. This study differs from those conducted previously by focusing on an intermediate group, namely, volunteer non-medical responders (e.g., merchants, bank tellers, building superintendents, and co-workers). This study will provide results that may help to develop informed public policy regarding the use of AEDs by volunteer non-medical persons.
DESIGN NARRATIVE:
This was a study of a comprehensive, integrated community approach in which volunteer non-medical responders (lay volunteers without a traditional responsibility to take charge in medical emergencies as their primary job description) were trained to use automated external defibrillators (AEDs). This approach is called Public Access Defibrillation (PAD). The hypothesis investigated was that PAD would significantly increase survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest by reducing the time interval from collapse to defibrillation. The specific aim of this randomized, controlled trial was to measure survival to hospital discharge following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in community units trained and equipped to provide public access defibrillation in addition to optimal standard care, compared to community units trained to provide optimal standard care (recognition of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, 911 access, cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Secondary aims included the comparison using Utstein criteria (Annals of Emergency Medicine 1991;20:861-74), neurological status, quality of life, cost, and cost-effectiveness between the two groups.
Participating research sites identified 1,000 units (e.g., public areas, gated communities, shopping malls, airport terminals, casinos, business parks) within their service area that anticipated at least 0.6 treatable out-of-hospital cardiac arrests within a 15 month period. Each unit was randomized to serve as either an intervention or control group, with comparative episode data collected for a 15 month period following a short preliminary data collection period (approximately 2 months to evaluate the ability for the site to capture event data) after training. Within each site, units were sub-randomized to a retraining strategy. Performance at retraining was monitored, and strategies modified if indicated.
Volunteer non-medical responders (e.g., office staff, bank tellers, merchants, and neighborhood volunteers) in both the intervention and control groups will be trained to provide the optimal standard of care: (a) recognize out-of-hospital cardiac arrest; (b) access 911 or its equivalent; and, (c) administer CPR. Volunteers in the intervention group will also be taught to use an AED promptly while awaiting arrival of the first public safety emergency medical team. The criteria for number and location of trained volunteers and devices will be a maximum 3-minute "walk through" to have the AED at the patient's side.
Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest victims in each of the two groups will be compared over the 15 month intervention period with respect to their: (a) survival to hospital discharge (primary outcome); (b) neurological status; (c) quality of life; and, (d) resource use/costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness of volunteer non-medical responder defibrillation will be calculated.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| defibrillator | Device | – |
Primary outcome
Not reported in the source record.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 14 Apr 2016.
- Background: PubMed 12589986Ornato JP, McBurnie MA, Nichol G, Salive M, Weisfeldt M, Riegel B, Christenson J, Terndrup T, Daya M; PAD Trial Investigators. The Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) trial: study design and rationale. Resuscitation. 2003 Feb;56(2):135-47. doi: 10.1016/s0300-9572(02)00442-2.
- Background: PubMed 15081178Mosesso VN Jr, Brown LH, Greene HL, Schmidt TA, Aufderheide TP, Sayre MR, Stephens SW, Travers A, Craven RA, Weisfeldt ML; PAD Trial Investigators. Conducting research using the emergency exception from informed consent: the Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) Trial experience. Resuscitation. 2004 Apr;61(1):29-36. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2003.11.016.
- Background: PubMed 15246580Sayre MR, Travers AH, Daya M, Greene HL, Salive ME, Vijayaraghavan K, Craven RA, Groh WJ, Hallstrom AP; PAD Investigators. Measuring survival rates from sudden cardiac arrest: the elusive definition. Resuscitation. 2004 Jul;62(1):25-34. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2004.02.007.
- Background: PubMed 15306665Hallstrom AP, Ornato JP, Weisfeldt M, Travers A, Christenson J, McBurnie MA, Zalenski R, Becker LB, Schron EB, Proschan M; Public Access Defibrillation Trial Investigators. Public-access defibrillation and survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med. 2004 Aug 12;351(7):637-46. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa040566.
- Background: PubMed 16086918Nichol G, Wells GA, Kuntz K, Feeny D, Longstreth W, Mahoney B, Mann C, Lucas R, Henry M, Huszti E, Birnbaum A. Methodological design for economic evaluation in Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) trial. Am Heart J. 2005 Aug;150(2):202-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2004.09.034.
- Background: PubMed 15529059Powell J, Van Ottingham L, Schron E. Public defibrillation: increased survival from a structured response system. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2004 Nov-Dec;19(6):384-9. doi: 10.1097/00005082-200411000-00009.
- Background: PubMed 16079421Richardson LD, Gunnels MD, Groh WJ, Peberdy MA, Pennington S, Wilets I, Campbell V, Van Ottingham L, McBurnie MA; PAD Trial Investigators. Implementation of community-based public access defibrillation in the PAD trial. Acad Emerg Med. 2005 Aug;12(8):688-97. doi: 10.1197/j.aem.2005.03.525.
- Background: PubMed 15733763Birnbaum A, McBurnie MA, Powell J, Ottingham LV, Riegel B, Potts J, Hedges JR; PAD Investigators. Modeling instructor preferences for CPR and AED competence estimation. Resuscitation. 2005 Mar;64(3):333-9. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2004.08.019.
- Background: PubMed 16290965Riegel B, Birnbaum A, Aufderheide TP, Thode HC Jr, Henry MC, Van Ottingham L, Swor R; PAD Investigators. Predictors of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and automated external defibrillator skill retention. Am Heart J. 2005 Nov;150(5):927-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2005.01.042.
Related trials for Arrhythmia
Active, not recruiting
VOLT CE Mark Study
Atrial Arrhythmia, Atrial Fibrillation
Enrolling by invitation
EDEN Intracardiac Electrogram Recording and Classifying System
Ventricular Arrhythmia
RecruitingObservational study
Southeast Asian Brugada Syndrome Cohort
Brugada Syndrome
Enrolling by invitation
VINTAGE (Ventricular Intramyocardial Navigation for Tachycardia Ablation Guided by Electrograms) Using Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Catheters
Ventricular Arrhythmia
Recruiting
Cardiac RADIoablation Versus Repeat Catheter Ablation: a Pivotal Randomized Clinical Trial Evaluating Safety and Efficacy for Patients With High-risk Refractory Ventricular Tachycardia (RADIATE-VT)
Tachycardia, Ventricular
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing defibrillator in people with Arrhythmia and Heart Arrest, run by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI).
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 14 Apr 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00004560, which also lists 9 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 14 Apr 2016.