Effect of Electric Shock on the Heart

Ferris, L. P.; King, B. G.; Spence, P. W.; Williams, Horatio B.

doi:10.1109/t-aiee.1936.5057302

Cited by 104 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…to 5 seconds by Kouwenhoven et al (1959). The results, together with earlier investigations by Ferris et al (1936) in sheep, have been analysed by Dalziel (1960). He suggests that, for man, a current of " i nmilliamps should be interrupted within " t " seconds for fibrillation to be prevented, when i and t are related by the formula 165 1=-…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Deaths from Electric Shock in 1962 and 1963

Lee¹

1965

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Deaths from Electric Shock in 1962 and 1963

Lee¹

1965

BMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Definition Shocks in the vulnerable period induce VF only if their strength is in an intermediate range, at or above the VF threshold and less than the ULV. 1,2,[4][5][6][7][8] The combination of shock coupling intervals (relative to the R wave or pacing stimulus) and shock strengths that induce VF in regular rhythm is the vulnerable zone. It is displayed as a bounded, homogeneous region in a twodimensional space defined by time (coupling interval) on the abscissa and shock strength on the ordinate (Fig.…”

Section: Background the Vulnerable Zonementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is part of the relative refractory period. 2 The upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) is the weakest shock strength at or above which VF is not induced when the shock is delivered at any time during the vulnerable period (Fig. 2).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using the Upper Limit of Vulnerability to Assess Defibrillation Efficacy at Implantation of ICDs

Swerdlow

Shehata

Chen

2007

Pacing Clinical Electrophis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The upper limit of vulnerability (ULV) is the weakest shock strength at or above which ventricular fibrillation (VF) is not induced when the shock is delivered during the vulnerable period. The ULV, a measurement made in regular rhythm, provides an estimate of the minimum shock strength required for reliable defibrillation that is as accurate or more accurate than the defibrillation threshold (DFT). The ULV hypothesis of defibrillation postulates a mechanistic relationship between the ULV-measured during regular rhythm-and the minimum shock strength that defibrillates reliably. Vulnerability testing can be applied at implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implant to confirm a clinically adequate defibrillation safety margin without inducing VF in 75%-95% of ICD recipients. Alternatively, the ULV provides an accurate patient-specific safety margin with a single fibrillation-defibrillation episode. Programming first ICD shocks based on patient-specific measurements of ULV rather than programming routinely to maximum output shortens charge time and may reduce the probability of syncope as ICDs age and charge times increase. Because the ULV is more reproducible than the DFT, it provides greater statistical power for clinical research with fewer episodes of VF. Limited evidence suggests that vulnerability testing is safer than conventional defibrillation testing.

show abstract

“…-Ferris, King, Spence, and Williams (1936) showed that in sheep the minimum current required to produce ventricular fibrillation was 23 mA when passed from foreleg to hindleg and 136 mA when passed from foreleg to foreleg. Incidentally, Dalziel (1946) in a critical study of these findings concluded that the minimum fibrillating current for men was about 100 mA.…”

Section: Joule Burnsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Clinical Study of Electrical Accidents

Lee

1961

Occupational and Environmental Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The report of a clinical study of 104 electrical accidents which befell 85 men is divided into two parts.Part I enumerates the different types of accidents as flash burn, Joule burn, arc eye, "held on" shock and "not held" shock, physical shock, and death. These are related to the different voltages involved ranging from 240/415 (medium) voltage to 33 kilovolts. There appeared to be no association between voltage and type of injury and no evidence to suggest that any of the voltages are free from hazard. There were 53 cases of flash burn, affecting mostly the face and extensor surface of the hands and arms. The 16 cases of arc eye caused no serious concern. Of the 15 Joule burns all except one occurred at medium voltages in "held on" accidents, the other being associated with an electric shock at 33 kilovolts. The majority of Joule burns affected the flexor surfaces.Part II of the paper deals with the 43 cases of electric shock (passage of current through the body). Thirty of these cases were "held on" to the circuit by the current. It was found that the longer a victim was held on to the circuit the greater appeared to be his chances of developing heart and chest symptoms suggestive of impending asphyxia, and of losing consciousness. Although about half of these men were released by an external agmncy and others struggled off, a number suddenly became free from the circuit without, they claimed, losing consciousness. This is difficult to explain. Artificial respiration was administered in two cases, one of whom was "held on" and was being asphyxiated. The other case received flash burns only and did not in fact receive an electric shock. PART I: GENERAL REVIEW AND NON-SHOCK CASESElectrical accidents receive little attention in British medical literature. In fact, in the electricity supply industry they account for only 1 % of the total number of accidents but they are the commonest cause of accidental death (Hughes and Corney, 1956). In factories, electrical accidents account for less than 0-5 % of all accidents, but more than 5% of these electrical accidents prove fatal (Emerson, 1961). This paper reports a clinical investigation into a series of electrical accidents; detailed consideration of the cases of electric shock (passage of current through the body) is given in Part II of this paper. MethodThe names of all men in an electricity supply undertaking who had sustained an electrical accident during the preceding three years were obtained. Of the total of 114, 107 were still employed by the undertaking. One man was killed; the remainder were contacted and 84 attended for interview. (The majority of those who were not seen worked in one small area and there is no reason to suppose that the nature of their accidents was any different from the whole.) They were all seen by one investigator and were questioned about the electrical and physical circumstances of the accident, about symptoms, and about subsequent medical history.

show abstract

Effect of Electric Shock on the Heart

Cited by 104 publications

References 25 publications

Deaths from Electric Shock in 1962 and 1963

Deaths from Electric Shock in 1962 and 1963

Using the Upper Limit of Vulnerability to Assess Defibrillation Efficacy at Implantation of ICDs

A Clinical Study of Electrical Accidents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About