Abstract

The aim of the study was to compare the success rate, procedure time, and user satisfaction of pediatric NIO™ compared to Pediatric BIG®, EZ-IO®, and Jamshidi intraosseous access devices. This was a randomized, crossover manikin trial with 87 paramedics. The correct location of intraosseous access when using NIO, BIG, EZ-IO, and Jamshidi was varied and was respectively 100, 90, 90, and 90%. The time required to obtain intravascular access (time T1) in the case of NIO, BIG, EZ-IO, and Jamshidi was varied and amounted to 9 s [IQR, 8–12] for NIO, 12 s [IQR, 9–16] for BIG, 13.5 s [IQR, 11–17] for the EZ-IO, and 15 s [IQR, 13–19] for Jamshidi. The paramedics evaluated each device on the subjective ease with which they performed the procedures. The intraosseous device, which proved the easiest to use was NIO, which in the case of CPR received a median rating of 1.5 (IQR, 0.5–1.5) points.Conclusion: Our study found that NIO® is superior to BIG®, EZ-IO®, and Jamshidi. NIO® achieved the highest first attempt success rate. NIO® also required the least time to insert and easiest to operate even by novice users. Further study is needed to test our findings in cadavers or human subjects. Based on our findings, NIO® is a promising intraosseous device for use in pediatric resuscitation.What is Known:• Venous access in acutely ill pediatric patients, such as those undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation, is needed for prompt administration of drugs and fluids.• Intraosseous access is recommended by American Heart Association and European Resuscitation council if vascular access is not readily obtainable to prevent delay in treatment.What is New:• This simulated pediatric resuscitation compared performance of four commercially available pediatric intraosseous devices in a manikin model.• NIO® outperformed BIG®, EZ-IO®, and Jamshidi in first attempt success rates and time of procedure among novice users.

Highlights

  • Simulation of the scenarioVascular access is a vital component of pediatric emergency medicine, and peripheral access in children in general is more difficult than in adults [2, 10, 14]

  • Eighty-seven paramedics (23 female, 26%) participated in this study and no paramedic had any previous experience with any intraosseous device

  • The correct location of intraosseous access was indicated in the vast majority of all insertion attempts (NIO 100%, BIG 90%, EZ-IO 90%, and Jamshidi 90%)

Read more

Summary

Conclusion

Our study found that NIO® is superior to BIG®, EZ-IO®, and Jamshidi. NIO® achieved the highest first attempt success rate. NIO® required the least time to insert and easiest to operate even by novice users. Further study is needed to test our findings in cadavers or human subjects. NIO® is a promising intraosseous device for use in pediatric resuscitation.

Study design
Introduction
Results
Discussion
Conclusions
Compliance with ethical standards
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call