• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Comparison of 3 different intraosseous access devices for adult during resuscitation. Randomized crossover manikin study.

作者信息

Kurowski Andrzej, Timler Dariusz, Evrin Togay, Szarpak Łukasz

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Institute of Cardiology, Warsaw, Poland.

Department of Emergency Medicine and Disaster Medicine, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.

出版信息

Am J Emerg Med. 2014 Dec;32(12):1490-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2014.09.007. Epub 2014 Sep 18.

DOI:10.1016/j.ajem.2014.09.007
PMID:25440232
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The study was designed to investigate the success rate and time of insertion intraosseous access during simulated resuscitation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a randomized crossover study involving 107 paramedics. They were timed from start of insertion attempt to successful insertion and asked to score perceived difficulty of intraosseus access devices. Bone injection gun (BIG) (WaisMed Company, Houston, TX), EZ-IO (Vidacare, Shavano Park, TX) and Jamshidi (Carefusion, San Diego, CA) were used in this study.

RESULTS

Success rates for first intraosseus iniecition attempt were higher for the BIG (91.59%) than EX-IO (82.66%) or Jamshidi (47.66%). Mean procedure time was 2.0±0.7 vs 3.1±0.9 minutes for EZ-IO vs 4.2±1.0 minutes for Jamshidi.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of BIG is associated with excellent success rates for insertion and appears easier to use than EZ-IO or Jamshidi Intraosseus Needle. Further work to evaluate the use of the intraosseus access device in the emergency medical services is required.

摘要

相似文献

1
Comparison of 3 different intraosseous access devices for adult during resuscitation. Randomized crossover manikin study.
Am J Emerg Med. 2014 Dec;32(12):1490-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2014.09.007. Epub 2014 Sep 18.
2
Comparison of four different intraosseous access devices during simulated pediatric resuscitation. A randomized crossover manikin trial.模拟小儿复苏期间四种不同骨内输液装置的比较:一项随机交叉人体模型试验
Eur J Pediatr. 2017 Jul;176(7):865-871. doi: 10.1007/s00431-017-2922-z. Epub 2017 May 12.
3
Comparison of two mechanical intraosseous infusion devices: a pilot, randomized crossover trial.两种骨髓腔内输注装置的比较:一项初步随机交叉试验。
Resuscitation. 2009 Sep;80(9):1029-33. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2009.05.026. Epub 2009 Jul 7.
4
Comparison of two intraosseous access devices in adult patients under resuscitation in the emergency department: A prospective, randomized study.两种在急诊科复苏中的成年患者的骨髓内通道设备的比较:一项前瞻性、随机研究。
Resuscitation. 2010 Aug;81(8):994-9. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.03.038.
5
Intraosseous devices: a randomized controlled trial comparing three intraosseous devices.骨内器械:三种骨内器械的随机对照试验。
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2010 Jan-Mar;14(1):6-13. doi: 10.3109/10903120903349861.
6
Comparison of Two Intraosseous Devices: The NIO Versus the EZ-IO by Novice Users-A Randomized Cross Over Trial.两种骨内装置的比较:新手用户使用NIO与EZ-IO——一项随机交叉试验
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2017 May-Jun;21(3):315-321. doi: 10.1080/10903127.2016.1247201. Epub 2016 Nov 21.
7
Paramedics successfully perform humeral EZ-IO intraosseous access in adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients.急救人员成功为院外心脏骤停成年患者进行肱骨髓内 EZ-IO 穿刺。
Am J Emerg Med. 2012 Sep;30(7):1095-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2011.07.010. Epub 2011 Oct 24.
8
EZ-IO(®) intraosseous device implementation in German Helicopter Emergency Medical Service.EZ-IO(®)骨内器械在德国直升机紧急医疗服务中的应用。
Resuscitation. 2015 Mar;88:43-7. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.12.015. Epub 2014 Dec 30.
9
Comparison of the Fluid Resuscitation Rate with and without External Pressure Using Two Intraosseous Infusion Systems for Adult Emergencies, the CITRIN (Comparison of InTRaosseous infusion systems in emergency medicINe)-Study.使用两种成人急救骨内输液系统比较有外部压力和无外部压力时的液体复苏速率,CITRIN(急诊医学中骨内输液系统比较)研究。
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 2;10(12):e0143726. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143726. eCollection 2015.
10
Military Medic Performance with Employment of a Commercial Intraosseous Infusion Device: A Randomized, Crossover Study.使用商用骨内输液装置时军事医务人员的表现:一项随机交叉研究。
Mil Med. 2018 May 1;183(5-6):e216-e222. doi: 10.1093/milmed/usx078.

引用本文的文献

1
Management of critically ill patients in austere environments: good clinical practice by the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI).严峻环境下危重症患者的管理:意大利麻醉、镇痛、复苏与重症监护学会(SIAARTI)的良好临床实践
J Anesth Analg Crit Care. 2024 Nov 6;4(1):74. doi: 10.1186/s44158-024-00209-8.
2
Comparison of four different intraosseous access devices during simulated pediatric resuscitation. A randomized crossover manikin trial.模拟小儿复苏期间四种不同骨内输液装置的比较:一项随机交叉人体模型试验
Eur J Pediatr. 2017 Jul;176(7):865-871. doi: 10.1007/s00431-017-2922-z. Epub 2017 May 12.
3
Challenges in the use of intraosseous access.
骨内通路使用中的挑战。
Indian J Med Res. 2016 Mar;143(3):261-3. doi: 10.4103/0971-5916.182613.
4
A Randomized Cadaver Study Comparing First-Attempt Success Between Tibial and Humeral Intraosseous Insertions Using NIO Device by Paramedics: A Preliminary Investigation.一项随机尸体研究:护理人员使用NIO装置比较胫骨和肱骨骨内插入首次尝试成功率的初步调查
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 May;95(20):e3724. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003724.
5
Use of intra-osseous access in adults: a systematic review.成人骨内通路的应用:一项系统评价。
Crit Care. 2016 Apr 14;20:102. doi: 10.1186/s13054-016-1277-6.
6
Comparison of the Fluid Resuscitation Rate with and without External Pressure Using Two Intraosseous Infusion Systems for Adult Emergencies, the CITRIN (Comparison of InTRaosseous infusion systems in emergency medicINe)-Study.使用两种成人急救骨内输液系统比较有外部压力和无外部压力时的液体复苏速率,CITRIN(急诊医学中骨内输液系统比较)研究。
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 2;10(12):e0143726. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143726. eCollection 2015.