A couple of comments here show confusion about who can use defibrillators and in particular whether a doctor is required. I thought I'd add my personal experience.
Specifically, I was defibrillated by bystanders when I had an out-of-hospital Ventricular Fibrillation episode. The staff at the UK building I was visiting had a defibrillator in their office and one of them had been on a training course.
When I collapsed with no warning, there was (according to my wife) about a minute of confusion and then one of the staff grabbed the defibrillator and used it. The device itself plays recorded instructions and itself conducts diagnostic tests to determine whether or not it should be used. If it can't detect a treatable condition it doesn't just blat you with electricity for the sake of it. If it can treat you, then it gives clear instructions to the users and delivers shocks as required.
In my case, the visitor centre staff had saved my life before the air ambulance arrived with trained medics. I was then flown to hospital where the critical cardiac care team confirmed that the bystanders had done exactly the right thing. They had also administered manual CPR which had kept my brain supplied with oxygen at the cost of two broken ribs. So here I am today writing this comment, thanks to the immediate availability of a defibrillator to bystanders.
I was lucky. My VF episode happened just as I had entered the lobby of the building that coincidentally contained the defibrillator. If I had been a 20 minute walk away, I would be dead (or brain damaged). Would a drone-based defibrillator have saved my life? Don't know, but it would certainly improve my chances.
> If it can't detect a treatable condition it doesn't just blat you with electricity for the sake of it
I was taught how to use one on a course where the instructor said he used to enjoy teaching students this fact by allowing them to take turns attempting to use a live defibrillator on him.
He got away with it for many years until his boss found out and put a stop to it because the company insurance wouldn't cover the company (despite clear witnessed consent being given by the instructor).
On the plus side, the company didn't ban his teaching method of NPA (Nasopharyngeal Airway) insertion. ;-)
> manual CPR which had kept my brain supplied with oxygen
Manual CPR done correctly is critical, and yes if done correctly you WILL end up with broken ribs. Mouth-to-mouth is not deemed particularly necessary these days (since the act of correct CPR will draw oxygen in anyway), better to focus on proper CPR and wait for the ambulance to turn up with high-flow oxygen from a tank.
> If I had been a 20 minute walk away, I would be dead (or brain damaged)
Yes. The most effective time for defib use is in the first 5 minutes. That's not to say you should not have a go after that time, but its effectiveness does drop away quite quickly.
> Mouth-to-mouth is not deemed particularly necessary these days (since the act of correct CPR will draw oxygen in anyway), better to focus on proper CPR and wait for the ambulance to turn up with high-flow oxygen from a tank.
Mouth-to-mouth isn't critical, but clearing the airway is. I remember one story from a first-aid refresher a few year, the guy doing it said he arrived at a car crash (doing a stint on an ambulance). A girl had been hit and was lying on the floor. Nobody had touched her in case they broke her neck or something.
She wasn't breathing. The ambulance had arrived within about 5 minutes, which was too late. Tilting her head back would likely have saved her life.
> Mouth-to-mouth isn't critical, but clearing the airway is.
Sure, but that goes without saying. Anybody who's been taught DRSABCD should know that.
Its also the reason why the FIRST thing you do when someone is choking is call for an ambulance (ideally on loudspeaker so you can get on with it at the same time, or, preferably get someone else to, if available). Even if you are successful in dislodging the item, they will still need a once-over by a trained medic because if you did it by the book it comes with side-risks.... so whichever way you won't be wasting the ambulance's time.
If you start trying things on choking and find you're not getting very far and then call an ambulance .... it'll probably be too late.
(Goes without saying that for heart issues, ambulance is also a high priority, but choking is far more time critical in the grand scheme of things).
Clearly not for the average person at that accident scene where the girl died, and indeed I believe that for most people - especially in a crowd - the first and last action is "shock". Maybe someone will phone for help.
My first aid training comes from hostile environments, where catastrophic bleeding fits in before airway. Unlikely to find someone with a missing limb down the high street, but there's not much point in CPR if the blood you pump is gushing out of the femoral artery.
I remember reading of one--kid ran behind the car that was backing out. *Minor* injuries, but fatal because the people were afraid to mess with a head wound. The kid was knocked unconscious and had a nosebleed--he drowned on the sidewalk.
> Yes. The most effective time for defib use is in the first 5 minutes. That's not to say you should not have a go after that time
Totally! After my experience I booked myself on a defibrillator training course, and looking back now, the main thing I remember from the course was the instructor's key learning point that you should get the defib out as soon as you can and let it take over. It pretty much can't make things worse than doing nothing.
Exactly. Hollywood always gets it wrong--shocking a non-beating heart does nothing (in fact, the whole purpose of the machine is to *stop* the heart!). The machines look for improper, useless beating and will not fire unless they see it. It's still possible to get the pads sufficiently wrong that the shock is wasted, but there's no way to shock someone who doesn't need it.
For a non-beating heart the only treatment is CPR until the docs can deal with whatever caused it not to beat in the first place.
When I was 3 years old my older brother tried to kill me and very nearly succeeded. As best anyone can recon, I was no breath no pulse for about 10 minutes. My life was saved by an EMT doing CPR. These people are incredible, and deserve every bit of praise and validation we can give them.
> Mouth-to-mouth is not deemed particularly necessary these days (since the act of correct CPR will draw oxygen in anyway), better to focus on proper CPR and wait for the ambulance to turn up with high-flow oxygen from a tank.
Not exactly. More precisely, for the “average” out of hospital cardiac arrest in an adult, chest compressions are more important than expired air resuscitation (mouth to mouth). The guidance to the public was watered down because there was recognition that members of the public were not enthusiastic about starting mouth to mouth resuscitation with a stranger. Mouth to mouth definitely helps.
You need a patent airway for any type of CPR to have any chance of working. Chin lift and jaw thrust are important for both compressions only and compression with breaths.
Source: I’m an attending anaesthesiologist and have resuscitated more people than I would like to count.
> The device itself plays recorded instructions and itself conducts diagnostic tests to determine whether or not it should be used. If it can't detect a treatable condition it doesn't just blat you with electricity for the sake of it
To expand on this a bit, defibs will only deliver a shock if they detect VF (ventricular fibrillation) or VT (ventricular tachycardia). These are considered shockable rhythms. Both involve malfunction of the electrical conduction system usually due to lacking oxygenated blood supply to the heart muscle itself.
A shock seeks (usually up to 300 joules depending on patient size) to reset the hearts' rhythm so the body's natural pacemaker (called the SA node, positioned in the top-right of the heart) can kick back in. If there's no shockable rhythm, the defib machines will usually instruct you to continue CPR (chest compressions) and then will ask you to stop after a cycle of 30 so it can re-analyze the rhythm. Otherwise CPR must continue until medics arrive. If the defib detect a normal rhythm (sinus rhythm) then that's good news and means the defib has been effective.
Pad placement is very important if you're administering defib. The pads are positioned so that the depolarization travels approximately down the septum of the heart, to emulate the normal electrical cascade.
Note: there are many types of heart malfunctions that can't be remedied by a defib but that doesn't mean you should do nothing. Always do CPR. Always call the emergency services.
Possibly of interest to HNers: It is a common misconception that a defib can bring a heart back from 'flat-lining' (asystole). Hollywood movies don't help. If there is asystole, medics will usually continue CPR until the rhythm changes whild trying to reverse any underlying causes of the heart failure (e.g. massive hemorrhaging or hypothermia).
A 30 Kg object drop from 1 meter onto one's foot will unleash around 300 Joules. The heaviest barbell plate is usually 25 Kg. So 300 Joules is a lots of energy. And I once heard a story, not sure how true it is, that someone put the defrib pads over the thigh and on activation the muscle contract so violently that breaks the bone.
>And I once heard a story, not sure how true it is, that someone put the defrib pads over the thigh and on activation the muscle contract so violently that breaks the bone.
I'm skeptical of this.
for the Americans out here:
30 Kg is ~66lbs
1 meter is about 3 feet
If an adult male (about 150 lbs) jumps off of a kitchen counter (about 3 feet) - each leg will absorb 75 lbs from 3 feet. I have done this many times and even my thin feet bones held the force. I'm pretty sure my thighs (our strongest bones) would be just fine.
They had also administered manual CPR which had kept my brain supplied with oxygen at the cost of two broken ribs
I did CPR on an elderly man I found having a heart attack in an alley in London. He was conscious when I found him. I called 999 and stayed with him. He "died" in front of me (no pulse, breathing, motion, loss of urine control). I did CPR until the ambulance arrived; I remember the sound of breaking ribs very clearly. They used a defib on him and he survived and until I moved away from the area I'd see him walking around from time to time.
Was a slightly odd feeling seeing him because I literally saw him "stop".
> The staff at the UK building I was visiting had a defibrillator in their office and one of them had been on a training course.
I have a Philips HeartStart at home. None of us are high risk (we're not obese, fit), or had family history of heart disease. We just like gadgets, and why take a chance?
The last company I worked as an employee at had defibrillators on every floor. While I had to take diversity training, and sensitivity training, I was never required to take -- or offered -- a class in defibrillator training.
At $work we all (or nearly all) get trained in CPR and the use of a defibrillator, and re-trained (and tested and certificated) every second year. We have a defibrillator (and scissors etc) on site where we can easily find it if it's ever needed.
(Also in UK) unless I've just become so accustomed to seeing fire extinguishers that I ignore them, it seems they are, and in some cases even more so. The bus stop near me (not a building, just a metal shelter that maybe 5 people can fit under) has a defib. I think our offices used to as well.
I'll bet. Seriously, that gave me pause to consider a refresher first aid course, it's been 15 years and I haven't had any use for it in all that time but it could make all the difference.
Do it! Do it! Booking the defib course was almost the first thing I did afterwards. That and arrange to meet the people who'd CPR'd me. That was a positive and powerful experience and good for them because they'd been much more traumatised than I was.
It's kind of crazy how much we rely on ambulances that most often than not feel like they're too slow.Now i know the feeling of time slowing down due to emotional involvement in the heat of the moment, but that doesn't mean there are not a lot of variables from the person needing help to the nearest 'trained medical expert'.The solution imo can be improved by having both more people know basic medical procedures and also more useful devices around.
Sorry about the ribs, but I'm glad they were trained well. Proper CPR breaks ribs.
I helped rescue a drowning man once. I pulled him from the water (he had been under a few minutes), and long story short, other folks did the CPR, and later a defib. The man died, but I had the impression his ribs survived.
It was like doing weird cardio, to a rhythm, while panicking that if your form is bad you will kill someone. Oh, and I stopped every couple of seconds to expell my entire breath into his mouth
FYI, in case it ever becomes relevant (hopefully not!), the standards for breath to compression ratios have changed. Last I heard about a decade ago, they had moved to 30:1 (compression:breath).
Turns out it's vastly more important to circulate blood than to give breaths, and additionally many people fail to deliver any breath, as it's trickier.
I appreciate that reminder. And for clearly pointing that out to future readers of this post.
For context, this was before the standards changed. I'm glad the standards reduced the amount of breathing (to make room for more heart pumping). Either way, it wouldn't have made a difference in my situation: the patient had a brain aneurysm with a "<1% chance of survival even it it happened in the ER"
----------------
Also, for future readers:
The probability that an amateur using CPR saves someone's life is 1:10,000
For paramedics, it is 1:1,000
So if your person dies, go easy on yourself and get some therapy
They're also looking at using them for transporting blood and organs between hospitals. Primarily being tested in western Sweden where it's mountainous enough that the straight line path the drone takes is considerably faster than the roads. Saw it on SVT Rapport a bit over a month ago.
I have a funny defibrillator story that seems tangentially relevant so I thought I'd share it.
I work for a company providing tools for safety-critical software, and so we were in discussions with a defibrillator company. They tried to argue that the defibrillator was not critical to the patient's life, and thus not subject to the relevant regulation, because the patient was already dead. No one bought this argument.
> we were in discussions with a defibrillator company. They tried to argue that the defibrillator was not critical to the patient's life, and thus not subject to the relevant regulation, because the patient was already dead
I'm amazed that they would take this line. In many cases, a person's heart is still very active when it is shocked by the external defibrillator, and the person is still breathing. In some types of VF (see my comment elsewhere [0]), the problem is that the normal synchronised contraction of the cardiac muscle fibres has broken down, and the heart is thus quivering spasmodically, not cleanly pumping. To break this cycle, the defibrillator emits a massive shock that causes the muscle fibres to simultaneously go into their 'reset' phase, and the hope is that the heart's natural pace maker (the sino-atrial node) can then take back control. It's like the defibrillator is shouting "will you all shut the fuck up!" into a crowded auditorium full of people talking over each other rather than listening to a presenter. The defibrillator can't magically restart an insert dead body.
If you're going to post a YouTube video, IMHO the ONLY one to post is the famous BBC one with Chris Solomon.[1]
TL;DR the BBC were in the right place at the right time. They were filming a documentary at a UK Air Ambulance office when the call taker had a cardiac arrest right there infront of them. They filmed the whole thing from start to finish and the guy gave his consent for them to release the video to the public.
> In a four-month pilot study testing the EMADE program, the service got 14 heart attack alerts that would be eligible for drones. Drones took off in 12 of those cases, and 11 successfully delivered the defibrillators. Seven of those defibrillators were delivered before the ambulance arrived.
So if this is the first patient saved does that mean all 11 people that were delivered defibrillators in the pilot study died?
Maybe, as it says, "The survival rate is about 10%" even though large numbers of people experience cardiac arrest in a clinical setting where they had defibrillators for years. Lots of Cardiac Arrest incidents aren't survivable, if your heart actually stopped they can't do anything about that. But without measuring (the first step the AED takes) you can't tell whether the heart is stopped or merely stuck twitching and not pumping blood, in the latter case the defibrillator may fix that, hence the name.
Anyone can do CPR and used an AED. If there's a doctor around let him do it, but if not, it's up to you. Make sure you are ready for it. Take a course if you get the chance, but if not, just read up on the basics of doing CPR and be aware that the AED will talk you through it and you are allowed an encouraged to use it.
Yep, my BS meter went flying. Mostly b/c key information about how the drone got there so quickly seems convenienly left out. Who called the emergency services (it wasn't the doctor)? Who contacted the service to send the drone? How did the drone get the exact location? Did the man just happen to live very close the where it was dispatched? And the fact that this is a press release should preclude it from being posted until an independent source verifies these details.
You say that, but the batteries have an expiration date and cost a significant portion of that $2000 which adds up. My very rural hometown (midwest US) is ending it's volunteer ambulance/first responder service in no small part due to these costs. I would argue having an ambulance without a defib is better than no ambulance, but laws don't care.
ZOLL AED uses ten Type 123 Lithium batteries. It's a consumer grade battery commonly see in camera flashlight. Cost around $30 to replace if buy from Amazon. The battery's shelf life is usually in the range of several years, even with the regular AED self-testing.
This is wonderful, and I also wonder how it compares cost-wise to maintaining AEDs in a distributed fashion. I know where my nearest defib is, and I know roughly how much it cost to install (Chf 2000) and maintain (Chf 200 / yr). What I don't know is how many fixed points like that could be replaced by one drone, even if it cost a lot more.
Also, most places in my village, it would be a 5 minute trip from my house to a patient. If I was dispatched towards a patient, would the AED arrive on their driveway before/with me?
pretty sure he's referring to the united states. The situation here is pretty horrific if you aren't privileged with a high paying job. There's a large part of the workforce holding onto shit jobs because they need the medical benefits.
Dental is even worse. its cheaper for me to fly to latin america, get some dental work done and enjoy a month long vacation than to get the same procedures done in the united states.
Yea so you then end up on the street when you can't pay those bills and go bankrupt. Either way, my point stands that a lot of people are slaves to their employer for need of health insurance.
Furthermore, proactive visits to the doctor aren't "emergencies." Prenatal checkups aren't either. Mom going into labor is not a good time for the doctors to find out the baby is coming in the wrong way or its head is stuck in her pelvis.
I'm tired of people making excuses for the shit-show that is healthcare in the US. It only looks good if you're coming from the third world.
Even in a country with a medical payment system as terrible as the US insurance is only a factor after an emergency, not during one. A homeless bum collapsing with a heart attack outside a hospital and they'll treat him just as well as Bill Gates. Now, outside an emergency like with followups after your heart is beating again this is a huge difference and going into collections after you can't pay is Not Fun. But lets not pretend the system is worse than it is.
We regret to inform you that your Trauma Team policy has expired due to lack of
payment. Please remember to activate your card immediately, so we may continue
to keep you healthy and safe in life's most dangerous moments. You can't afford
to hesitate when your livelihood is at stake.
Trauma Team
They are hardwired, to stay on trickle charge. And they need to be serviced once a year (check battery, check that the pads are not expired). So your best bet is to call the phone number on your fire extinguisher, which also needs yearly inspections.
Drones are not ambulances, this is probably for rural or mountainous areas, better than nothing until help arrives. Smart watches calling emergency services for you based on sensors does happen already though.
From watching British television, at least, I gather that "Brilliant!" usually is akin to American "Cool!" or "That's great!". On the other hand, in the US we would use "brilliant" to describe Albert Einstein (or someone else who is exceptionally intelligent).
I think there's a bit of a nuanced difference in how we use the word "clever" as well. Where you would call someone clever, we would usually say he is smart (or maybe brilliant, if smart enough). "Clever" in the US often has a slightly derogatory sense to it. Someone who is good at solving a Rubik's cube is clever. Yes, it takes a certain intelligence but of a gimmicky sort.
I would say that in the UK we use both, with a different meaning according to context. But yes I agree that "Brilliant!", "Super!", and "Fab!" are all British ways of saying the same thing.
> In a four-month pilot study testing the EMADE program, the service got 14 heart attack alerts that would be eligible for drones. Drones took off in 12 of those cases, and 11 successfully delivered the defibrillators. Seven of those defibrillators were delivered before the ambulance arrived.
It doesn't say how many of the 7 were actually used. I imagine it's less likely if there doesn't happen to be a doctor on scene.
Defibrillators are now fairly fool proof and relatively easy to use, some of them even give you audio instructions on how to use them. I’m sure in most cases someone would be on the phone to an emergency medical expert.
My guess is that they either didn’t save the patient or it wasn’t the right tool needed.
The only difference between a medically trained person and an average bystander is that the medical person will be more used to assessing the situation, taking a decision and then intervening with the patient.
You need no training to safely use an AED, though it will ask you to do chest compressions, and without training, the compressions are likely to be ineffective. Good compressions are surprisingly violent, and you'd never do that to someone unless you'd received training explaining why and how.
Less likely yes, but the publicly accessible defibrillators are pretty easy to use.
They have big prints on them where to place the pads and after pressing the big green "On" button they start talking to you, explaining what to do.
They are also included in the standard CPR first-aid courses nowadays.
Yup. I wish these were required in every business and public space, similar to fire extinguishers. Or even in every car, part of the mandatory first aid kit (I'm talking Europe here).
I think this is a chicken&egg problem: such requirement would be expensive initially but as the production of AED scaled up prices would drop.
Obviously training is required too, I'm not sure how feasible it is to get large fraction of population trained...
I think the cost for a defibrilator is around 3000 Euro. If you really want to, buy one (team up with your sports club, your company or some friends) and gift it to your community. They'll find a busy place to mount it.
You can get one for about 1000 euro (maybe 1100) new, about half for a used one. They cost about 100 Euro a year to service. Source: I have a used unit at home.
Most business have one here in Sweden and almost all public places like train stations, malls, hotels have one. Most taxis carry one to and can be alerted by 112 (the SOS number operators, 911 in the US) if they are close. Rural areas are the unsolved problem that these drones might help with.
The base issue with these is - besides the initial cost - is the maintenance.
An unused (hopefully) defibrillator needs to be periodically checked for battery levels and (I believe) some sort of diagnostics run to be certain that when/if needed it will be efficient.
Like with fire extinguishers or other periodical checks, most probably this must be done by someone qualified/specialized, which may represent a non trivial cost, I wouldn't be surprised if it was something in the 200-400 Euro/year or something like that, and probably every n (5-8?) years you would need to replace the device with a new one.
Besides, there is an issue (in non-restricted access placements) about theft and vandalism.
See the other comment please, seems like service cost is reasonable.
Vandalism and theft sure are problems, placing them in locations with either camera surveillance (bank foyers, gas stations) or 24/7 personell available might be solutions to these problems.
If you think about the potential good it can make in case of need, the cost (whatever it is) is reasonable, what I was trying to say (without in any way negating the usefulness of having more of these in more places) is that the initial cost is small when compared to the overall costs (direct and indirect).
It has been introduced by Law only recently here (Italy) in a number of public places, and there are a lot of perplexities about the bureaucracy connected, the reliability of this or that model (or manufacturing firm) availability of spares, legal responsabilities of the provider, etc.
I believe (but I may be wrong as - as said - they are not yet common here) that the trend is towards some forms of "service" or lease/rent for the devices including their maintenance and all the bureaucratic paper and electronic work (by Law the device needs to be "registered" on a "online map").
Costs at the moment for this latter approach (rent + service) start from as low as 20 to something like 60 Euro/month for 48/60 months contracts, AFAIK, and they include an insurance against theft/vandalism, but it has to be seen how it will work out.
Some details of the norms around these are not clear (yet).
They appear to be cost effective if there is at least a 20% chance of use annually (which you could estimate from the population that would be close enough to use it).
I doubt putting it in every car is cost effective.
It’s not necessary to train people in how to use AEDs (the ones intended for public use talk you through it, and I expect the emergency operators can too)
How it works here is bigger business and public places have them - the public ones are in little boxes and the 999 operators will tell you where they are plus give you the key codes (I just checked and surprisingly my city has roughly six public ones for every 10,000 people, not even counting the ones routinely in ambulances and DC police cars)
The vast majority of European countries at least [0]. Every car needs to have one, their contents is standardised and since they're produced in huge quantities, they're hilariously cheap.
First aid training and an exam are also mandatory for getting your driver's license in many countries.
Check out the link, it also has color coded maps for first aid kit, fire extinguishers and high-vis jacket requirements.
The first aid kit also usually means required first aid training as part of getting a driver's license. However I don't know if any countries require refresh sessions, so most people probably forget all except the basics.
They seem to be coming down a lot - I remember looking a year or two ago and they were above $3000 AUD here, but now I can find some for around $1500 - $2000 (around US$1100 or €950). It's getting down to the point where I could basically justify buying my own one to carry with my first aid kit...
I really think this kind of record shows its near pointless. It requires a doctor to be nearby and be aware of the incident in order to work. What are the chances of that? So far the record says 1 in 12 but I think they got lucky with that.
In italy ADE (in italian known as DAE) can be used by anybody: when you call emergency number, they ask you for the problem and if needed, operator suggests you to find an ade. If you can find one nearby, it's the device itself that instructs you how to apply it to the patient and how to use it, by speaking to you and it's super simple even for people that don't have any health or emergency support knowledge. The ade device monitors the patient and decides itself if it must release the charge shock or not (sorry for my english, hope you understand what i mean!).
So this is not a useless device and being able to deliver an ade device faster even in places where it would took time to send an ambulance, it's significantly important and personally i'd be more happy to see flying drones equipped with ade than drones equipped with stuffs bought on amazon or somewhere else: that would be a good use of drone technology for our humanity
In the UK there are automatic defibrilators all over the place for the public to use. The devices can measure the patients heart rythms and decide when to activate, meanwhile an automated voice tells the rescuer what to do.
AEDs are designed to be used by people who have no medical knowledge. They typically provide simplified controls with, visual and voice prompts to attach the device to the patient's chest. After that they work automatically.
Due to their medical training, the doctor is likely to have done a better job at providing CPR than a random passing member of the public though.
One in ten survives so if 2% extra survives because of this the it worth it. You are right to some extent the time limits are so extreme, 10 min after the heart attack and no one surives. According to the article the wife had not called emergancy services when he arrived. I wonder if that is the biggest problem, were we need to educate older people; call fast.
Specifically, I was defibrillated by bystanders when I had an out-of-hospital Ventricular Fibrillation episode. The staff at the UK building I was visiting had a defibrillator in their office and one of them had been on a training course.
When I collapsed with no warning, there was (according to my wife) about a minute of confusion and then one of the staff grabbed the defibrillator and used it. The device itself plays recorded instructions and itself conducts diagnostic tests to determine whether or not it should be used. If it can't detect a treatable condition it doesn't just blat you with electricity for the sake of it. If it can treat you, then it gives clear instructions to the users and delivers shocks as required.
In my case, the visitor centre staff had saved my life before the air ambulance arrived with trained medics. I was then flown to hospital where the critical cardiac care team confirmed that the bystanders had done exactly the right thing. They had also administered manual CPR which had kept my brain supplied with oxygen at the cost of two broken ribs. So here I am today writing this comment, thanks to the immediate availability of a defibrillator to bystanders.
I was lucky. My VF episode happened just as I had entered the lobby of the building that coincidentally contained the defibrillator. If I had been a 20 minute walk away, I would be dead (or brain damaged). Would a drone-based defibrillator have saved my life? Don't know, but it would certainly improve my chances.