2018 Volume 83 Issue 747 Pages 929-939
This study aims to solve the following problems in emergency lifesaving operation caused by the increase of large-scale facilities with skyscrapers in big cities in Japan: The Urban Planning Act and the Building Standards Act do not have technical standards to shorten time required for giving first aid and to improve a lifesaving rate inside a building, as well as technical guidelines in planning optimal placement of emergency equipment.
In case an emergency report is sent to the firehouse through a disaster prevention center, for example, measures will be taken depending on circumstances: Where an emergency elevator is available, the rescue party can use it immediately after arriving at the building. In addition to this, if AED is optimally placed, it could be possible for bystander to use AED quickly and effectively until the ambulance arrives. Carried by a worker in a disaster prevention center, AED will enable quick cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Likewise, it could be effective to place AED in elevators, as some elevator companies have recently proposed.
Accordingly, in consideration of the factors referred to above, this paper intends to construct a method for calculating survival rate resulting from placement of AEDs and apply it to the model case in order to investigate the optimal placement of AEDs.
The study method is as follows: A fifty-four-storied building is assumed as a model building of large-scale urban facilities with skyscrapers, the total floor space of which is approximately 400,000 square meters and whose height of the eaves is exceeding 230 meters. The average survival rate in this model building is obtained by three-dimensional calculation constructed by the Manhattan distance and the formula for calculating elevator speed. The optimal placement of AEDs is determined by using three types of survival curves (Survival Success Rate Curve, Golden Hour Principle, and Dr. Drinker's Survival Curve). In regard to the optimal placement of AEDs and the average survival rate, this research compares the differences according to the number or place of AEDs.
The results have mostly common contents to three types of survival carves as follows:
In case of placing four AEDs in the model building, a lifesaving rate can be improved by the placement of one in a disaster prevention center, another one in an emergency elevator controlled by the center and the remaining two in the 53rd and the 54th floor, compared with the placement of one in the center and the remaining three in the 36th, the 45th and the 52nd floor. This means that the AED placed in an emergency elevator functions effectively. The difference in the average life-saving rate over the buildings between the case with three AEDs on the optimal floors, namely, the 52nd, 53rd, and 54th floors of the model building, in addition to two AEDs, one in the disaster prevention center and one in each elevator, and the case with fifty-five AEDs, one on each floor and one in the disaster prevention center, was 0.0333 points for the survival curve of the successful survival rate, 0.0356 points for the Golden Hour Principle, and 0.0175 points for Dr. Drinker's Survival Curve.
This article examines the optimal placement of AEDs as a floor plan, based on the assumption of a standard center core and emergency elevators installed in the vicinity of sidewalls opposed to each other. What remains to be considered is the optimal placement of AEDs in floor plans of a sandwich-like core and an off center core.
