Cargando…

Comparison of mechanical and manual bone marrow puncture needle for intraosseous access; a randomized simulation trial

BACKGROUND: During resuscitation, when it is difficult or impossible to establish peripheral venous access, intraosseous route (IO) is considered as an alternative to a central venous line. However, it is sometimes difficult for obtain IO access with conventional manual bone puncture needle. Recentl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ohchi, Fumihiro, Komasawa, Nobuyasu, Mihara, Ryosuke, Minami, Toshiaki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4422831/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25977898
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-0982-y
_version_ 1782370115839328256
author Ohchi, Fumihiro
Komasawa, Nobuyasu
Mihara, Ryosuke
Minami, Toshiaki
author_facet Ohchi, Fumihiro
Komasawa, Nobuyasu
Mihara, Ryosuke
Minami, Toshiaki
author_sort Ohchi, Fumihiro
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: During resuscitation, when it is difficult or impossible to establish peripheral venous access, intraosseous route (IO) is considered as an alternative to a central venous line. However, it is sometimes difficult for obtain IO access with conventional manual bone puncture needle. Recently, powered mechanical bone marrow needle was developed. We compared the performance of the manual and mechanical bone marrow puncture needle for adult, child and infant simulation. METHODS: 22 anesthesiologists, who has never used bone marrow puncture needle, performed manual (Dickman™, Cook Medical) or mechanical (EZ-IO™, Teleflex) bone marrow puncture to simulated adult, child and infant tibia. Puncture success rate, insertion time, and subjective difficulty utilizing visual analogue scale was assessed. RESULTS: In adult settings, with the manual bone marrow needle, only 3 of 22 participants could succeed in the IO route keep, while all participants did in the mechanical bone marrow puncture needle (P < 0.001). In child and infant settings, all trials were successful in both manual and mechanical bone marrow puncture needles (P = 1.00). In adult simulations, IO insertion took significantly longer with manual bone marrow puncture (54.8 ± 15.8 s) than without compressions (3.7 ± 2.1 s; P < 0.001). In child and infant simulations, the IO insertion time was significantly smaller in mechanical trials than in manual ones (child simulation; manual 9.3 ± 4.6 s, mechanical 2.2 ± 0.8 s, P < 0.001, infant simulation; manual 2.0 ± 1.1 s, mechanical 1.5 ± 0.8 s, P = 0.003). Although the VAS score was not significantly higher with manual trials than in mechanical trials among the three simulations (adult simulation, P < 0.001, child simulation, P < 0.001, infant simulation P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that in simulations managed by anesthesiologists who had no clinical experiences with bone marrow puncture, the mechanical bone puncture needle performed better than the manual one for emergency IO route access.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4422831
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44228312015-05-14 Comparison of mechanical and manual bone marrow puncture needle for intraosseous access; a randomized simulation trial Ohchi, Fumihiro Komasawa, Nobuyasu Mihara, Ryosuke Minami, Toshiaki Springerplus Research BACKGROUND: During resuscitation, when it is difficult or impossible to establish peripheral venous access, intraosseous route (IO) is considered as an alternative to a central venous line. However, it is sometimes difficult for obtain IO access with conventional manual bone puncture needle. Recently, powered mechanical bone marrow needle was developed. We compared the performance of the manual and mechanical bone marrow puncture needle for adult, child and infant simulation. METHODS: 22 anesthesiologists, who has never used bone marrow puncture needle, performed manual (Dickman™, Cook Medical) or mechanical (EZ-IO™, Teleflex) bone marrow puncture to simulated adult, child and infant tibia. Puncture success rate, insertion time, and subjective difficulty utilizing visual analogue scale was assessed. RESULTS: In adult settings, with the manual bone marrow needle, only 3 of 22 participants could succeed in the IO route keep, while all participants did in the mechanical bone marrow puncture needle (P < 0.001). In child and infant settings, all trials were successful in both manual and mechanical bone marrow puncture needles (P = 1.00). In adult simulations, IO insertion took significantly longer with manual bone marrow puncture (54.8 ± 15.8 s) than without compressions (3.7 ± 2.1 s; P < 0.001). In child and infant simulations, the IO insertion time was significantly smaller in mechanical trials than in manual ones (child simulation; manual 9.3 ± 4.6 s, mechanical 2.2 ± 0.8 s, P < 0.001, infant simulation; manual 2.0 ± 1.1 s, mechanical 1.5 ± 0.8 s, P = 0.003). Although the VAS score was not significantly higher with manual trials than in mechanical trials among the three simulations (adult simulation, P < 0.001, child simulation, P < 0.001, infant simulation P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that in simulations managed by anesthesiologists who had no clinical experiences with bone marrow puncture, the mechanical bone puncture needle performed better than the manual one for emergency IO route access. Springer International Publishing 2015-05-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4422831/ /pubmed/25977898 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-0982-y Text en © Ohchi et al.; licensee Springer. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.
spellingShingle Research
Ohchi, Fumihiro
Komasawa, Nobuyasu
Mihara, Ryosuke
Minami, Toshiaki
Comparison of mechanical and manual bone marrow puncture needle for intraosseous access; a randomized simulation trial
title Comparison of mechanical and manual bone marrow puncture needle for intraosseous access; a randomized simulation trial
title_full Comparison of mechanical and manual bone marrow puncture needle for intraosseous access; a randomized simulation trial
title_fullStr Comparison of mechanical and manual bone marrow puncture needle for intraosseous access; a randomized simulation trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of mechanical and manual bone marrow puncture needle for intraosseous access; a randomized simulation trial
title_short Comparison of mechanical and manual bone marrow puncture needle for intraosseous access; a randomized simulation trial
title_sort comparison of mechanical and manual bone marrow puncture needle for intraosseous access; a randomized simulation trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4422831/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25977898
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-0982-y
work_keys_str_mv AT ohchifumihiro comparisonofmechanicalandmanualbonemarrowpunctureneedleforintraosseousaccessarandomizedsimulationtrial
AT komasawanobuyasu comparisonofmechanicalandmanualbonemarrowpunctureneedleforintraosseousaccessarandomizedsimulationtrial
AT mihararyosuke comparisonofmechanicalandmanualbonemarrowpunctureneedleforintraosseousaccessarandomizedsimulationtrial
AT minamitoshiaki comparisonofmechanicalandmanualbonemarrowpunctureneedleforintraosseousaccessarandomizedsimulationtrial