An evaluation of the Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) Demonstration

6.9 Drivers for self-funding AED(s)

Page last updated: August 2008

Managers were also asked if they would or would not (definitely or probably) invest in the installation of AED(s) under various scenarios (Figure 24). The overall ratings showed that:

  • All managers indicated that their organisations would buy the AED(s) if it became a regulatory requirement (100%)
  • Four in five managers (82%) would buy the AED(s) if it was included in Government guidelines for safety in the workplace and
  • Three in five managers (59%) would buy the AED(s) for the health and safety of the public; and staff occupational health and safety (56%) (similar to the response reported in Section 6.8.4.)
Only two managers reported that their organisation would definitely not invest in the installation of AED(s) if government funding was no longer available. Of all other 51 organisations, it was fairly evenly divided between organisations having an internal implementation team to manage the program (47%) and commissioning an external consultant to manage the program (45%) (Figure 25).

One third of organisations had considered purchasing an AED prior to involvement in the Pad Demonstration. After being involved in the Project, half would consider purchasing an AED if government funding was no longer available.

Government guidelines for safety in the workplace were more likely to influence the purchase of AEDs for respondents, than general concerns about public health and safety.


6.9.1 Perceived value of Pad demonstration elements

The Pad Demonstration includes a number of elements (Figure 26). Over half (57%) of managers valued the supply of the free AED most highly. Staff training was the second most valued aspect of the project (25% ranked this the most important), followed by backup and support from St John and lastly supporting documentation (47% ranked this fourth).

The same pattern of response was found among the 53% of organisations that indicated that they would 'definitely' or 'probably' invest in AED implementation if government funding was no longer available: 57% ranked the supply of the AED most highly; 18% staff training; 21% the backup and support; and 4% considered the supporting documentation most valuable. Top of page

Figure 24: Drivers for self-funding AED(s)

Q44. I am now going to read out a number of scenarios that may influence your organisations decision to buy, train staff and maintain AEDs. Do you think your organisation would spend ($3,000 multiplied by no. of AEDs in Q11) on the initial purchase and training cost for the AED for <INSERT STATEMENT>. Would you say definitely, probably, maybe, probably not or definitely not?

Figure 24: Drivers for self-funding AED(s)

Top of page

Figure 25: Management of self-funded AED

Q46. Do you think that your organisation would have an internal implementation team to manage the program or that it would commission an external consultant to manage the program (for example, this could include having a program point of contact, medical direction, program maintenance, data management, development of protocols and response plans)?

Figure 25: Management of self-funded AED

Top of page

Figure 26: Ranking of key elements in Pad Demonstration

Q42. The PAD Demonstration Project includes a number of elements: the supply of the AED; staff training by St John; backup and support from St John; and provision of supporting documentation from St John (like brochures and posters). What do you value the most (RECORD 1) and the second (RECORD 2), third (RECORD 3) and what is of least value (RECORD 4)?

Figure 26: Ranking of key elements in Pad demonstration