Ambulance Drones in Norway

48 Pages·2016·1.75 MB·English

by  Thomas Rootwelt

Ambulance Drones in Norway
A Stakeholder Analysis
Thomas Rootwelt
Master in Science of Project Management
Submission date: June 2016
Supervisor: Bjørn Andersen, IPK
Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Department of Production and Quality Engineering

i
Acknowledgment
I would like to thank my supervisor Bjørn Andersen, and my mother, who probably did more
workonthisthanIdid.
T.R.
ii
Summary and Conclusions
Cardiacarrestsclaimmillionsofliveseachyear. Theconditioncanoftenbetreatedwithade-
fibrillator,buttimeisaverycriticalfactor. Asaconsequence,survivalratesarelow.
Recent developments in drone technology have made civilian drones cheap, easy to oper-
ate, and reliable. This paper looks into opportunities to use drones to deliver defibrillators to
out-of-hospitalcardiacarrestvictimsfasterthananambulance. Themainfocusisonunifying
theneedsofemergencyresponsewiththerulesandregulationsrequiredtooperatethedrones
safely.
Thestudyisperformedasaliteraturestudycombinedwithinterviews. Theprimarystake-
holderswereidentifiedasemergencyresponseandtheCivilianAviationAuthority.
Theresultsshowedthattherewasbothaperceiveduseforambulancedronesandawayto
legallyusethem. Thesuggestedapproachinvolvesusingambulancedronesatsportingevents
such as "Birkebeinerrennet" as a proof of concept, before more advanced or permanent pro-
gramsareconsidered.
Sammendrag
Hjertestanskrevermilioneravlivhvertår.Tilstandenkanoftebehandlesmedhjertestarter,men
erogsåmegettidskritisk. Somenkonsekvenseroverlevelsesratenlav.
Nyvinningerinnendroneteknologihargjortsiviledronerbillige, enkleåbruke, ogrobuste.
Denne rapporten ser på muligheter for å bruke droner til å levere hjertestartere til pasienter
som får hjertestans utenfor sykehus raskere enn en ambulanse. Hovedfokuset er på å forene
behovenefornødhjelpmedloverogreglersomkrevesforåkunneflydronenepåentryggmåte.
Studien er en litteraturstudie kombinert med intervjuer. Hovedaktører er nødhjelpen og
Luftfartstilsynet.
Resultatene viser at det er både et estimert behov for ambulansedroner, og måter de kan
brukes på i henhold til loven. Den anbefalte tilnærmingen er å bruke ambulansedroner ved
idrettsarrangementer som "Birkebeinerrennet" som pilotprosjekt, før eventuelt mer avanserte
programmerblirvurdert.
Contents
Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
SummaryandConclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
1 Introduction 2
1.1 ProblemFormulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.5 StructureoftheReport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2 Theory 6
2.1 Drones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.1 Civiliandronetechnology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1.2 Autonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1.3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2 Lawsandregulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3 Hearthattacksandemergencyresponse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3.1 HearthattacksandemergencyresponseinNorway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3.2 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3 Method 16
3.1 Subjectandscope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.2 Choiceofmethod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.3 QualitativeResearchInterviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
iii
CONTENTS iv
3.3.1 AnalysisMethod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.4 Initialinterviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.4.1 Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.4.2 Peopleinterviewed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.5 Secondinterviews. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.6.1 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4 ResultsandDiscussion 22
4.1 InitialInterviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.1.1 CAA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.1.2 Innovation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.1.3 Emergencyresponse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.1.4 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.2 SecondInterviewsandSuggestedApproach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.2.1 Concept1: Manualdronesystematlarge,outdoorsportingevents . . . . . 26
4.2.2 Concept 2: Manual drone system covering a popular ski-area during the
ski-season . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.2.3 Concept3: Automaticsystemcoveringamajorcity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.3 FeasibilityStudy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5 Conclusion 35
5.1 Findoutifambulancedronescouldprovideabenefit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.2 Findoutabouttherisksthatcouldbeinvolvedwithambulancedrones . . . . . . . 35
5.3 Createalistofrequirementsorsuggestionsforambulancedrones . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.4 FurtherWork. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
A Acronyms 37
List of Figures
1.1 AED(picturefromWikipediacommons) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1 PredatorDrone(picturefromwikipediacommons) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2 ResponsetimesinNorway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3 ResponsetimesinOslo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1
Chapter 1
Introduction
Sudden cardiac arrest is a condition that claims many lives each year, as much as 700,000 in
Europealone(1). Acommonrhythmforahearttobeinifasuddencardiacarrestoccursout-
sideahospitalisventricularfibrillation(VF).Thismeansthattheelectricalsignalsintheheart
arestuckinachaoticstateandtheheartisunabletocontractasaconsequence. Inahospital,
doctors would attempt to “reset” the heart using a defibrillator, but these are not available ev-
erywhere. CPRaloneisveryrarelyenoughtorestartaheart,andisdonetokeepthevictimalive
untiladefibrillatorandmedicationcanbeadministered.
Time is probably the most important factor in survival. According to the American Heart
Association(2), risk of death rises by 7-10% for each minute that passes between collapse and
defibrillation. Thisisreducedto3-4%perminuteifCPRisapplieduntiladefibrillatorarrives.
BothCPRanddefibrillationarevitalforsurvival(3).
Due to the need for defibrillators to be used quickly, automated systems have been placed
insomeheavilyoccupiedareas,suchasairports,shoppingcenters,trainstations,andsoforth.
TheseareknownasAutomatedExternalDefibrillators(AEDs)(4),andaredesignedtobesimple
enough to be used by untrained bystanders, using visual and audio commands to direct the
user. As the name implies, these devices can automatically diagnose and restart hearts that
havestoppedduetoventricularfibrillationorventriculartachycardia.
Another technology that has appeared in recent years is the civilian drone. Remote con-
trolledaircraftsuchasplanesandhelicoptershaveexistedforalongtime, butinrecentyears,
autonomous aircraft able to carry cameras and goods have become more commonplace, and
2
CHAPTER1. INTRODUCTION 3
Figure1.1: AED(picturefromWikipediacommons)
available to most people. Most importantly however, these drones are able to automatically
navigatetoaGPScoordinate,andmoveatconsiderablespeed. Theyarealsoabletobringafew
kilosofpayloadwiththem.
Smartphones have also seen a rise in popularity recently, to the point where most people
haveone(5). WhatisimportanttothispaperisthattheyhaveinternalGPSmodulesandappli-
cationsexistthatcanautomaticallyshareyourpositionwillemergencyserviceswhenyouneed
help(althoughnotyetinNorway).
Thesetechnologiescreateopportunitiestosavevictimsofcardiacarrestbyusingdronesto
carryAEDstothevictims. Intheory,thiscouldsavelivesbyshorteningthetimefromcollapse
todefibrillation. Inpractice,however,thisconceptfacesseveralchallenges. Firstly,whileallthe
componentsofthetechnologyexist,completesystemshavenotmaturedorevenbeencreated
at all. This means that systems would need to be developed and cannot be bought complete-
off-the-shelfattimeofwriting.Secondly,thelawsandregulationsinNorwayputseriousrestric-
tionsonwhatdronesareallowedtodo. Thismeansasystemwouldeitherhavetofollowthese
rules or wait for the rules to be changed. Lastly, there is little data on whether such as system
would actually provide a benefit, how big the benefit would be, or how much it would cost to
acquireanduse.
CHAPTER1. INTRODUCTION 4
1.1 Problem Formulation
Thepurposeofthispaperistoperformastakeholderanalysisonthepossibilityofimplement-
ing such a system in Norway. The main stakeholders in such a system is the Norwegian Civil
AviationAuthority(Luftfartstilsynet),andthemedicalpersonnelwhowouldusethesystemand
benefit from it. The stakeholder analysis will be performed as a series of interviews with the
CAAandmedicalpersonnel,withthegoalofcreatingaseriesofrecommendationsandrequire-
ments.
Themainproblemliesinfindingasolutionthatcompromisesthepotentialneedfordrones
inemergencyserviceswiththepotentialdangersforairtrafficandbystanders.
1.2 Objectives
ThemainobjectivesofthisMaster’sprojectare:
1. Findoutifambulancedronescouldprovideabenefit
2. Findoutabouttherisksthatcouldbeinvolvedwithambulancedrones
3. Createalistofrequirementsorsuggestionsforambulancedrones
1.3 Limitations
Thisisastakeholderanalysis,andthefieldofciviliandronesisrapidlychangingandevolving.
Itislikelythatthetechnologiesinvolvedwillhavechangedwithinjustashorttimeafterwriting,
andopinionsofinterviewedpartiesarelikelytochangealongwiththem.
1.4 Approach
This is a stakeholder analysis based on interviews and literature study. Each interview is per-
formedeitherbyphone,skype,ormail,andthequestionsvary. Thebasicideaofinterviewisto
presenttheopportunitiesthatdronescouldprovideincardiacemergencies,andaskwhatthey
thinkareimportantsuccessfactors.