Intelligent Virtual Agents 8th International Conference, IVA 200
This book constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Intelligent Virtual Agents, IVA 2008, held in Tokyo, Japan, in September 2008. The 18 revised full papers and 28 revised short papers presented together 42 poste
- PDF / 296,726 Bytes
- 10 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 6 Downloads / 213 Views
CEW Research Models: Animal and Human Studies Theodore C. Chan and Gary M. Vilke
Research on CEWs has involved both animals and humans. Multiple investigators have conducted extensive, detailed and complex experimental studies on animal models, as well as human volunteer subjects to measure, monitor, and determine the physiologic effects of CEWs. The findings and results of these animal and human experimental studies have varied and, as a result, the conclusions drawn by investigators as well as other experts have been inconsistent and at times in wide disagreement. Animal and human subjects each have different strengths and weaknesses as research models. These differences relate to the applicability of each model to actual scenarios and occurrences reported in the field, the different methodologies that must be employed for each, and the relative merits of each model to replicate so-called ‘‘real-world’’ conditions. This chapter will compare experimental research on CEWs conducted in animal models and human subjects. Other sections of this text will review many of these studies in greater detail. In this chapter, we will focus on the different strengths and weaknesses of research conducted in animal models and human subjects, and their implications in terms of assessing the physiologic effects and overall safety of CEWs.
8.1 Animal Versus Human Experimental research studies on CEWs have been conducted in dogs, pigs, and humans. In terms of these animal models, the basic question remains whether findings from these studies can be extrapolated to humans. Pigs have been favored in this regard because of the animal’s similarity to humans in terms of body mass and heart size (Fig. 8.1). On the other hand, while these animals have been used extensively in the study of cardiac arrest and resuscitation, some have T.C. Chan (*) Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Diego Medical Center e-mail: [email protected] M.W. Kroll, J.D. Ho (eds.), TASER1 Conducted Electrical Weapons: Physiology, Pathology, and Law, DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-85475-5_8, Ó Springer ScienceþBusiness Media, LLC 2009
109
110
T.C. Chan and G.M. Vilke
Fig. 8.1 Relative anatomic differences between dog, pig, and human study subjects. Typical adult dog and pig weights are 30–35 and 60–65 kilograms compared to adult human weight of 70 to 80 kilograms.
argued that pigs make ‘‘poor surrogates’’ for human cardiac physiologic responses to electrical discharges from CEWs [1]. In addition, there are differences in skin, connective soft tissue, muscle mass, and body geometry that may limit the ability to generalize the findings of these studies. Data are available dating back to the 1930s demonstrating that small swine are sensitive to the electrical induction of ventricular fibrillation (VF) [2]. In dogs and humans the Purkinje fibers are confined to a very thin endocardial layer [3]. In pigs they cross the entire ventricular wall [4]. Recent work has demonstrated that activation in swine proceeds from the epicardium to the endocardium w
Data Loading...
