The impact of locked cabinets for automated external defibrillators (AEDs) on cardiac arrest and AED outcomes: A scoping review

Background

Rapid public defibrillation with automated external defibrillators (AEDs) is critical to improving out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survival. Concerns about AED theft and vandalism have led to implementing security measures, including locked cabinets. This scoping review, conducted as part of the evidence review for the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation, explores the impact of securing AEDs in locked cabinets.

Methods

Searches of Medline, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL (from database inception to 25/5/2024) and Google Scholar (first 200 articles). Studies of any type or design, published with an English abstract, examining the impact of locked AED cabinets were included. The included studies were grouped by outcomes, and an iterative narrative synthesis was performed.

Results

We screened 2,096 titles and found 10 relevant studies: 8 observational studies (4 published as conference abstracts) and 2 simulation studies. No study reported patient outcomes. Studies reported data on between 36 and 31,938 AEDs. Most studies reported low rates (<2%) of theft/missing/vandalism, including AEDs that were accessible 24/7. The only study comparing unlocked and locked cabinets showed minimal difference in theft and vandalism rates (0.3% vs. 0.1%). Two simulation studies showed significantly slower AED retrieval when additional security measures, included locked cabinets, were used. A survey of first responders reported half (25/50) were injured while accessing an AED that required breaking glass to access.

Conclusion

The limited literature suggests that vandalism and the loss of AEDs are rare and occur in locked and unlocked cabinets. Research on this topic is needed that focuses on real-life retrieval and patient outcomes.