An evaluation of two conducted electrical weapons using a swine comparative cardiac safety model

Donald M. Dawes, Jeffrey D. Ho, Johanna C. Moore, Andrew P. Laudenbach, Robert F. Reardon, James R. Miner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Scopus citations

Abstract

Arrest-related deaths proximate to the use of a conducted electrical weapon (CEW) continue to generate controversy despite a better understanding of the multi-factorial nature of many of these deaths. With the rapid adoption of this technology by law enforcement, and the proliferation of companies entering the marketplace, it is important to have a method to assess the relative safety of these weapons. We had previously developed a model to assess the relative cardiac safety of CEWs. In this study, we use this model to compare the TASER X2 and the Karbon Arms MPID. Our results suggest that the TASER X2 may have an improved cardiac safety margin over the Karbon Arms MPID as determined by a smaller area of cardiac pacing on the anterior chest in our model. This model seems to offer a reproducible means of comparing the cardiac effects of CEWs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)329-335
Number of pages7
JournalForensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology
Volume10
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2014

Keywords

  • CEW
  • Cardiac safety
  • Conducted electrical weapon
  • Karbon Arms
  • MPID
  • TASER
  • X2

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'An evaluation of two conducted electrical weapons using a swine comparative cardiac safety model'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this