RESUMEN
Objective@#Although several studies have been conducted on the use of ultrasound to assist in arterial punctures, its utility is controversial and it is also inconvenient to use the equipment in the emergency room. Therefore, we developed a radial artery puncture assistive device for use in the emergency room and evaluated its utility. @*Methods@#The operator attempted the procedure on a mannequin, both with and without the device. We recorded the first-attempt success rate, the number of punctures, the time to success, and the failure rate. We conducted a survey to assess pre-experiment expectation and post-experiment satisfaction. @*Results@#The first-attempt success rate was 78% with no device and 66% with the device (P=0.105). The failure rate was 5% both when the device was not worn and worn (P>0.99). The number of attempts was 2.18 with no device and 2.10 with the device (P=0.765). The time to success was 40.81 seconds without the device and 54.08 seconds with the device (P=0.307). The responses to the pre-experiment survey were 5% for ‘Not wearing the device seems to be more helpful’, 75% for ‘Wearing the device seems to be more helpful’, and 20% for ‘There seems to be no difference’. In the postexperiment survey, the responses were 30% for ‘Not wearing the device was more helpful’, 55% for ‘Wearing the device was more helpful’, and 15% for ‘There was no difference’. @*Conclusion@#There were no significant results from the experiments. But respondents felt that wearing the device was better in both the pre-experiment and post-experiment survey.
RESUMEN
Objective@#Although several studies have been conducted on the use of ultrasound to assist in arterial punctures, its utility is controversial and it is also inconvenient to use the equipment in the emergency room. Therefore, we developed a radial artery puncture assistive device for use in the emergency room and evaluated its utility. @*Methods@#The operator attempted the procedure on a mannequin, both with and without the device. We recorded the first-attempt success rate, the number of punctures, the time to success, and the failure rate. We conducted a survey to assess pre-experiment expectation and post-experiment satisfaction. @*Results@#The first-attempt success rate was 78% with no device and 66% with the device (P=0.105). The failure rate was 5% both when the device was not worn and worn (P>0.99). The number of attempts was 2.18 with no device and 2.10 with the device (P=0.765). The time to success was 40.81 seconds without the device and 54.08 seconds with the device (P=0.307). The responses to the pre-experiment survey were 5% for ‘Not wearing the device seems to be more helpful’, 75% for ‘Wearing the device seems to be more helpful’, and 20% for ‘There seems to be no difference’. In the postexperiment survey, the responses were 30% for ‘Not wearing the device was more helpful’, 55% for ‘Wearing the device was more helpful’, and 15% for ‘There was no difference’. @*Conclusion@#There were no significant results from the experiments. But respondents felt that wearing the device was better in both the pre-experiment and post-experiment survey.
RESUMEN
No abstract available.