Aim: When there is a rhythm like ventricular fibrillation or pulseless ventricular tachycardia, prompt and effective defibrillation is the critical intervention in cardiac arrest. Therefore, knowing what to do and being familiar with the instruments used for this purpose is vital. The present study aimed to investigate the possibility of insufficient knowledge and opinions of consultant and resident anesthesiologists about defibrillators and to put forward constructive proposals for reforming, if necessary.

Material and Method: This cross-sectional survey study included consultant and resident anesthesiologists. We sent questionnaires to 467 anesthesiologists via e-mail. The questionnaire included demographics, working status, duration, residency institution, workplace, experience with the defibrillator and automated external defibrillator (AED), previous cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training, and technical knowledge of defibrillators &AEDs.

Results: Three hundred and forty (72.8%) anesthesiologists filled out the questionnaires. Their mean age was 38.3±8.3 years. Twenty- five percent of them were residents. Of the anesthesiologists, 325(95.6%) used a defibrillator, 129(37.9%) witnessed out-hospital cardiac arrest, 69(20.3%) used AEDs, and 216(63.5%) attended CPR courses. There are significant differences in opinions and knowledge of anesthesiologists about defibrillator/defibrillation when compared to working duration, workplace, being a consultant, and having a previous CPR course.

Conclusion: Experience and information about defibrillators among anesthesiologists seem to be lacking. Continuous retraining through the guidelines can be considered as a possible updating method.

Keywords: Cardiac arrest, ventricular fibrillation, pulseless ventricular tachycardia, defibrillation, automatic external defibrillation