让自动体外除颤器（AED）动起来：增强城市流动性的除颤器部署方案

中文摘要 AI 辅助

及时获取自动体外除颤器（AED）仍是公共-access除颤系统的主要限制，因为固定AED网络无法适应院外心脏骤停（OHCA）需求的空间和时间变化。我们研究一种平台支持的移动AED模型，其中AED由现有城市网约车车队搭载，可被调度至OHCA地点。我们不假设额外的AED容量，而是保持总AED供应量固定，比较固定部署与移动部署之间的替代分配方案，包括同时保留两种覆盖形式的混合策略。我们的分析利用来自纽约市和多伦多的真实城市数据，整合了地理参考的公共AED库存、EMS报告的OHCA事件数据以及网约车移动数据。结果显示，移动AED可大幅缩短响应时间并提高可靠性，但收益取决于AED容量在固定与移动部署之间的划分方式。在纽约市，平均响应时间增益超过2.5分钟，且当约55%至70%的AED容量为移动状态时达到峰值；超出该范围后，随着固定覆盖减少，增益和可靠性均下降。在多伦多，平均增益接近4分钟，且当系统向完全移动配置过渡时趋于平稳。这些对比模式表明，移动AED可显著改善可及性，但固定与移动AED的最佳组合必须根据当地覆盖和移动条件进行定制。

英文摘要

Timely access to automated external defibrillators (AEDs) remains a major limitation of public-access defibrillation systems because stationary AED networks cannot adapt to spatial and temporal variation in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) demand. We study a platform-enabled mobile AED model in which AEDs are carried by existing urban ride-hailing fleets that can be dispatched to OHCA locations. Rather than assuming additional AED capacity, we hold the total AED supply fixed and compare alternative allocations between stationary and mobile deployment, including hybrid policies that retain both forms of coverage. Our analysis leverages real-world urban data from New York City and Toronto, integrating georeferenced public AED inventories, EMS-reported OHCA incident data, and ride-hailing mobility data. The results show that mobile AEDs can substantially improve both response times and reliability, but the benefits depend on how AED capacity is divided between stationary and mobile deployment. In New York City, average response-time gains exceed 2.5 minutes and peak when approximately 55 to 70 percent of AED capacity is mobile; beyond this range, both gains and reliability decline as stationary coverage is reduced. In Toronto, average gains approach 4 minutes and then plateau as the system moves toward a fully mobile configuration. These contrasting patterns show that mobile AEDs can materially improve access, but the best mix of stationary and mobile AEDs must be tailored to local coverage and mobility conditions.

发表机构

• Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto（多伦多大学罗特曼管理学院）
• DeGroote School of Business, McMaster University（麦克马斯特大学德格罗特商学院）

机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。