Acute cardiac care & resuscitationResearch article
Device damage and malfunction during dual defibrillation or dual electrical cardioversion: a scoping review
- scoping review
- in accordance with JBI methodology and PRISMA-ScR
- PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and gray literature were searched without language or date restrictions
- Regulatory adverse event databases were also searched
Authors' conclusion
Device damage and malfunction during dual defibrillator use are documented in both published and regulatory sources. Damage may remain occult until later testing, creating risk beyond the index case. Standardized prospective reporting and routine post-use device testing should be considered wherever dual defibrillator use is employed.
Study context
- Population
- Sources reporting device damage or malfunction associated with two external defibrillators delivering shocks within one second or less of each otherrecords from 2016 to 2026 included · published sources five · regulatory adverse event reports 24
- Participants
- Twenty-nine participants
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Device damage and malfunction in published sources
events of lasting device damage
eight
temporary malfunctions
four
Further findings
Device damage and malfunction in regulatory reports
- records describing device damage
- 11
- records describing malfunctions
- 16
- Across 24 regulatory reports
Recognition of damage
- Reported damage was often not recognized during the index event and was instead identified on post-use testing or later routine self-checks
Published source designs
- randomized trials
- two
- survey study
- one
- case report
- one
- ad-hoc retrospective study
- one
Original publication
Device damage and malfunction during dual defibrillation or dual electrical cardioversion: a scoping review. Resuscitation. Published 1 July 2026. doi:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2026.111186
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it