Little Andrew, Alsbrooks Kimberly, Jones Drew
Department of Emergency Medicine AdventHealth Orlando Orlando Florida USA.
Medical Affairs Becton, Dickinson and Company Franklin Lakes New Jersey USA.
J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open. 2022 Apr 29;3(3):e12710. doi: 10.1002/emp2.12710. eCollection 2022 Jun.
This study evaluated physician preferences and values related to the most commonly used (traditional) powered intraosseous (IO) system and a novel powered IO system featuring a passive safety needle, battery life indicator, and snap-securement/skin attachment.
Emergency physicians participated in an IO simulation using both the traditional and novel IO systems. Participants completed a 27-item postsimulation questionnaire to state their preferences toward each IO system and values related to the novel IO system features using a multiple choice, 11-point value ranking scale (0 = no value, 10 = extremely valuable) and free-text answer questions.
Among the 22 study participants, 90.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 70.8%, 98.9%) preferred the novel IO system; top reasons for this preference were the novel IO system's passive safety needle and snap-securement/skin attachment. Participants who preferred the traditional IO system (9.1%) noted its ease of use and familiarity. Many physicians preferred the novel IO system's needle (81.8%; 95% CI: 59.7%, 94.8%), powered driver (77.3%; 95% CI: 54.6%, 92.2%), and snap-securement/skin attachment (100%; 95% CI: 84.6%, 100%) compared with the traditional IO system. Safety and ease of use were the most common preference explanations. Of the participants, 100% provided a value score ≥7 for the novel IO system's passive safety needle (mean score, 9.45), whereas fewer participants (59.1%) gave a value score ≥7 for the multilight battery life indicator (mean score, 6.68).
This study demonstrates that emergency physicians prefer and value a novel IO system with features that enhance safety and ease of use. These results provide insight into important factors related to IO systems for emergency physicians.
本研究评估了医生对于最常用的（传统）动力骨髓腔内（IO）系统以及一种具有被动安全针、电池寿命指示器和卡扣固定/皮肤附着功能的新型动力IO系统的偏好和价值观。
急诊医生使用传统和新型IO系统参与了一次IO模拟。参与者完成了一份包含27个项目的模拟后问卷，通过多项选择、11分价值排名量表（0 = 无价值，10 = 极有价值）和自由文本回答问题来表明他们对每个IO系统的偏好以及与新型IO系统特征相关的价值观。
在22名研究参与者中，90.9%（95%置信区间[CI]：70.8%，98.9%）更喜欢新型IO系统；这种偏好的主要原因是新型IO系统的被动安全针和卡扣固定/皮肤附着。更喜欢传统IO系统的参与者（9.1%）指出其使用方便和熟悉。与传统IO系统相比，许多医生更喜欢新型IO系统的针（81.8%；95% CI：59.7%，94.8%）、动力驱动器（77.3%；95% CI：54.6%，92.2%）和卡扣固定/皮肤附着（100%；95% CI：84.6%，100%）。安全性和易用性是最常见的偏好解释。在参与者中，100%对新型IO系统的被动安全针给出了≥7的价值评分（平均评分，9.45），而对多灯电池寿命指示器给出≥7价值评分的参与者较少（59.1%）（平均评分，6.68）。
本研究表明急诊医生更喜欢并重视一种具有增强安全性和易用性特征的新型IO系统。这些结果为与急诊医生相关的IO系统的重要因素提供了见解。
