Epidemiology, use, and practice of the intraosseous route in an out-of-hospital emergency department: a retrospective cross-sectional study.

Introduction: The Spanish Emergency Medical Services, according to the model we know today, were formed during the 80s and 90s of the 20th century. The Health Emergency Service (EMS), 061 La Rioja, began to assist the population of La Rioja in November 1999. An essential part of the mission of the SES is the provision of care and the transfer of critical patients using advanced life support unit (ALSU) techniques. In daily practice, out-of-hospital emergency services are faced with situations in which they must deal with the care of serious or critically ill patients, in which the possibility of being able to channel peripheral vascular access as part of ALSU quickly may be difficult or impossible. In these cases, cannulation of intraosseous (IO) vascular access may be the key to early and adequate care. Aim: This study aimed to determine the incidence and epidemiology use of IO vascular access in SES 061 La Rioja during the year 2022. Matherial and methods: We performed observational retrospective cross-sectional studies conducted in 2022. It included a population of 4.364 possible patients as a total of interventions in the community of La Rioja in that year. Results: A total of 0.66% of patients showed a clinical situation that required the establishment of IO vascular access to enable out-of-hospital stabilization; this objective was achieved in 41.3%. A total of 26.1% of patients who presented with cardiorespiratory arrest (CA) were stabilized, while 100% presented with shock and severe trauma. Discussion: IO vascular access provides a suitable route for out-of-hospital stabilization of critically ill patients when peripheral vascular access is difficult or impossible.

[Intraosseous vascular access - step by step]. / Intraossärer Zugang ­ Schritt für Schritt.

Probably everyone who works in emergency medicine has been in the situation of having to insert a peripheral vein under time pressure in difficult venous conditions. So what do I do if I don't succeed? Establish a peripheral venous catheter? In recent years, the intraosseous approach has become increasingly popular as an alternative procedure. In this article, you will be guided step by step through the creation of an intraosseous access.

A comparison between intraosseous and intravenous access in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The optimal vascular access for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) remains controversial. Increasing evidence supports intraosseous (IO) access due to faster medication administration and higher first-attempt success rates compared to intravenous (IV) access. However, the impact on patient outcomes has been inconclusive. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study in Taoyuan City, Taiwan, from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2022, included patients aged ≥18 years with non-traumatic OHCA resuscitated by emergency medical technician paramedics (EMT-Ps) with either IVs or IOs for final vascular access. The exclusion criteria were cardiac arrest en route to the hospital and resuscitation during the coronavirus pandemic (from May 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022). The primary and secondary outcomes were sustained ROSC (≥2 h) and cerebral performance category (CPC) 1-2, respectively. Univariate logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the primary analysis. Multivariable logistic regression was employed, with variables selected based on a p-value of <0.05 in the univariate analysis. The survival benefits of different insertion sites and subgroups like general ambulance teams (with a composition that includes fewer EMT-Ps and limited experience in using IO access) were also analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 2003 patients were enrolled; 1602 received IV access and 401 IO access. The median patient age was 70 years, and most were male (66.6%). Compared to patients receiving IV access, the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for primary and secondary outcomes in patients with IOs were 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.11; p = 0.20) and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.39-2.40; p = 0.93), respectively. Different insertion sites showed no outcome differences. In the subgroups of females and patients resuscitated by general ambulance teams, the aORs for sustained ROSC were 0.55 (95% CI, 0.33-0.92; p = 0.02) and 0.62 (95% CI, 0.41-0.94; p = 0.02), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with OHCA resuscitated by EMT-Ps, IO access was comparable to IV access regarding patient outcomes. However, in females and patients resuscitated by general ambulance teams, IV access might be favorable.

Biodistribution and Safety of Human Multi-Chimeric Cells After Systemic Intraosseous and Intravenous Administration in the Experimental Mouse Model.

Cellular therapies provide promising options for inducing tolerance in transplantation of solid organs, bone marrow, and vascularized composite allografts. However, novel tolerance-inducing protocols remain limited, despite extensive research. We previously introduced and characterized a human multi-chimeric cell (HMCC) line, created through ex vivo fusion of human umbilical cord blood (UCB) cells derived from three unrelated donors. In this study, we assessed in vivo biodistribution and safety of HMCCs in the NOD.Cg-PrkdcscidIl2rgtm1Wjl/SzJ NOD scid gamma (NSG) mouse model. Twenty-four NSG mice were randomly assigned to four groups (n = 6/group) and received intraosseous (IO.) or intravenous (IV.) injections of 0.6 × 106 donor UCB cells or fused HMCC: Group 1-UCB (IO.), Group 2-UCB (IV.), Group 3-HMCC (IO.), and Group 4-HMCC (IV.). Hematopoietic phenotype maintenance and presence of human leukocyte antigens (HLA), class I antigens, in the selected lymphoid and nonlymphoid organs were assessed by flow cytometry. Weekly evaluation and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessed HMCC safety. Comparative analysis of delivery routes revealed significant differences in HLA class I percentages for IO.: 1.83% ± 0.79%, versus IV. delivery: 0.04% ± 0.01%, P < 0.01, and hematopoietic stem cell marker percentages of CD3 (IO.: 1.41% ± 0.04%, vs. IV.: 0.07% ± 0.01%, P < 0.05) and CD4 (IO.: 2.74% ± 0.31%, vs. IV.: 0.59% ± 0.11%, P < 0.01). Biodistribution analysis after IO. delivery confirmed HMCC presence in lymphoid organs and negligible presence in nonlymphoid organs, except for lung (IO.: 0.19% ± 0.06%, vs. IV.: 6.33% ± 0.56%, P < 0.0001). No evidence of tumorigenesis was observed by MRI at 90 days following IO. and IV. administration of HMCC. This study confirmed biodistribution and safety of HMCC therapy in the NSG mouse model, both following IO. and IV. administration. However, IO. delivery route confirmed higher efficacy of engraftment and safety profile, introducing HMCCs as a novel cell-based therapeutic approach with promising clinical applications in solid organ, bone marrow, and vascularized composite allotransplantation transplantation.

Umbilical vein catheterisation for the family physician working in primary health care.

This is part of a series of articles on vascular access in emergencies. The other two articles were on intra osseous lines and central venous lines. These are critical lifesaving emergency skills for the primary care professional. In this article, we will provide an overview of umbilical vein catheterisation highlighting its importance, the indications, contraindications, techniques, complications and nursing considerations. By familiarising healthcare providers with this procedure, we hope to enhance their knowledge and skills, ultimately leading to improved outcomes in the neonatal population.

The Use of Intraosseous Infusion in the Early Resuscitation of Patients With Extremely Severe Burns.

According to research, shock, the most common complication of extremely severe burns, is also the leading cause of mortality among patients with such burns. The case fatality rate reaches 83.45% when the total burn area exceeds 90%. The American Heart Association in 2020 recommended the intraosseous (IO) access after the peripheral access and prior to the central venous access when venous cannulation is either difficult or delayed. The use and experience with intraosseous infusion in extremely severe burns are still limited. We report efficacy and safety results from 19 burn patients treated with IO infusion between June 2020 and December 2022. In these patients, the mean injury time of burns was 1.55 ± 1.10 hours, the mean burn surface area was 86.24% ± 11.33%, the mean catheterization time was 49.68 ± 10.11 seconds, and the mean emergency retention time was 2.75 ± 1.74 hours, the mean actual fluid supplement amount was 5,533.68 ± 3,077.19 mL, the mean hourly urine volume of the patient was 93.31 ± 60.94 mL, the mean emergency detention time was 4.16 ± 2.97 hours, and the mean duration of hospitalization was 34.50 ± 25.38 days. The results demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement and higher response rate vs peripheral venous cannulation and an acceptable safety profile in those patients.

Resuscitation and Evaluation With Intraosseous Access: A Review of the Literature in Trauma and Non-Trauma Patients.

According to trauma resuscitation guidelines, intraosseous (IO) access is appropriate when failure to gain intravenous (IV) access is present in trauma, burn, shock, or resuscitation settings for adults or when two failed attempts have been made in the resuscitation of a pediatric patient. However, their effectiveness and use have been debated due to concerns on flow rates, extravasation, compartment syndrome, and osteomyelitis. The objective of this review is to examine the current literature regarding intraosseous access in trauma resuscitation, focusing on interventions and complication rates.

Integration of Intraosseous Approach Method in Georgia.

OBJECTIVE: In pediatric emergencies, as in case of shock, the use of intraosseous (IO) route is recommended to get rapid vascular access as soon as possible, as it revealed better outcome. Nevertheless, the IO approach is not used at all and/or is limited because of lack of demand and lack of training on the issue of medical staff. The aim of the study was to test applicable and/or demand of IO in clinics providing pediatric critical care services and assess the opportunities to integrate IO access use in emergency care in Georgia. METHODS: A quasi-experimental study was conducted, following a training of medical staff to perform IO access procedure. Our study involved 140 children admitted to emergency department, 114 of whom underwent venous access and 26 underwent IO access. Several parameters were monitored and reported. Outcomes were compared between the 2 procedures. RESULTS: Use of an IO catheter has significantly altered the clinical outcome of the patient's condition; 35% of the total number of patients needed to continue their treatment in the intensive care unit, whereas 65% of the patient's continued treatment in the various general wards (compared with 99% and 1%, respectively, in intravenous access patients). None of IO patients were transferred to other clinics because of the deterioration of their clinical condition. Complications in the form of local infection were not observed in any of the patients using the IO approach (which is interesting in terms of infection control). CONCLUSION: With proper training and in certain indications, the internationally approved method can be safely used in pediatric emergency management in Georgian and similar country health system contexts. Several urgent conditions with high rates of requiring hospitalization could benefit from the IO approach.

A Prospective Comparison of Standard Technique, Doppler Ultrasonography, and Pressure Waveform Analysis for Confirming Intraosseous Catheter Placement.

Purpose: Intraosseous (IO) catheters allow healthcare workers to rapidly administer fluids and medications to critically ill patients when intravenous access is inadequate or unable to be obtained. An improperly placed IO catheter can lead to delays in care, as well as serious complications such as limb necrosis. Methods: In this single-center, prospective, observational study, we compared 2 established methods of confirming proper IO catheter placement to a novel pressure waveform analysis technique in which the IO catheter is attached to a standard pressure transducer. Attaching a pressure transducer to a properly placed IO catheter produces a pulsatile waveform. Misplacement of the IO catheter produces a flatline waveform. Results: Of 42 IO catheters, 8 (19%) were incorrectly placed per the waveform analysis technique. Compared to the pressure waveform analysis technique, the standard method and the power Doppler method incorrectly classified 4/8 (50%) and 5/8 (62.5%) of the misplaced catheters, respectively. The standard method had a higher positive predictive value for detecting incorrectly placed IO catheters than the power Doppler method (100% vs 63%, respectively). Blinded reviewers demonstrated better agreement using the pressure waveform analysis technique than using power Doppler (k = 0.77 vs k = 0.58, respectively). Conclusion: The standard and power Doppler ultrasonography techniques identify incorrectly placed IO catheters sub-optimally. The pressure waveform analysis technique is more accurate than the standard of care and has superior interrater agreement compared to the ultrasound method of confirmation. With more than 500 000 IO catheters placed in the United States each year, this novel technique may improve overall IO safety. Trial Registration Number: NCT03908879.

Effectiveness of Sternal Intraosseous Device in Patients Presenting with Circulatory Shock: A Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhagic shock requires timely administration of blood products and resuscitative adjuncts through multiple access sites. Intraosseous (IO) devices offer an alternative to intravenous (IV) access as recommended by the massive hemorrhage, A-airway, R-respiratory, C-circulation, and H-hypothermia (MARCH) algorithm of Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC). However, venous injuries proximal to the site of IO access may complicate resuscitative attempts. Sternal IO access represents an alternative pioneered by military personnel. However, its effectiveness in patients with shock is supported by limited evidence. We conducted a pilot study of two sternal-IO devices to investigate the efficacy of sternal-IO access in civilian trauma care. METHODS: A retrospective review (October 2020 to June 2021) involving injured patients receiving either a TALON® or a FAST1® sternal-IO device was performed at a large urban quaternary academic medical center. Baseline demographics, injury characteristics, vascular access sites, blood products and medications administered, and outcomes were analyzed. The primary outcome was a successful sternal-IO attempt. RESULTS: Nine males with gunshot wounds transported to the hospital by police were included in this study. Eight patients were pulseless on arrival, and one became pulseless shortly thereafter. Seven (78%) sternal-IO placements were successful, including six TALON devices and one of the three FAST1 devices, as FAST1 placement required attention to Operator positioning following resuscitative thoracotomy. Three patients achieved return of spontaneous circulation, two proceeded to the operating room, but none survived to discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Sternal-IO access was successful in nearly 80% of attempts. The indications for sternal-IO placement among civilians require further evaluation compared with IV and extremity IO access.

The association of tibial vs. humeral intraosseous vascular access with patient outcomes in adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrests.

AIM: Humeral and tibial intraosseous (IO) vascular access can deliver resuscitative medications for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), however the optimal site is unclear. We examined the association between IO tibia vs. humerus as the first-attempted vascular access site with OHCA outcomes. METHODS: We used prospectively-collected data from the British Columbia Cardiac Arrest registry, including adult OHCAs treated with IO humerus or IO tibia as the first-attempted intra-arrest vascular access. We fit logistic regression models on the full study cohort and a propensity-matched cohort, to estimate the association between IO site and both favorable neurological outcomes (Cerebral Performance Category 1-2) and survival at hospital discharge. RESULTS: We included 1041 (43%) and 1404 (57%) OHCAs for whom IO humerus and tibia, respectively, were the first-attempted intra-arrest vascular access. Among humerus and tibia cases, 1010 (97%) and 1369 (98%) had first-attempt success, and the median paramedic arrival-to-successful access interval was 6.7 minutes (IQR 4.4-9.4) and 6.1 minutes (IQR 4.1-8.9), respectively. In the propensity-matched cohort (n = 2052), 31 (3.0%) and 44 (4.3%) cases had favourable neurological outcomes in the IO humerus and IO tibia groups, respectively; compared to IO humerus, we did not detect an association between IO tibia with favorable neurological outcomes (OR 1.44; 95% CI 0.90-2.29) or survival to hospital discharge (OR 1.29; 95% CI 0.83-2.01). Results using the full cohort were similar. CONCLUSIONS: We did not detect an association between the first-attempted intra-arrest IO site (tibia vs. humerus) and clinical outcomes. Clinical trials are warranted to test differences between vascular access strategies.

Trends in use of intraosseous and intravenous access in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest across English ambulance services: A registry-based, cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The optimum route for drug administration in cardiac arrest is unclear. Recent data suggest that use of the intraosseous route may be increasing. This study aimed to explore changes over time in use of the intraosseous and intravenous drug routes in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in England. METHODS: We extracted data from the UK Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Outcomes registry. We included adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients between 2015-2020 who were treated by an English Emergency Medical Service that submitted vascular access route data to the registry. The primary outcome was any use of the intraosseous route during cardiac arrest. We used logistic regression models to describe the association between time (calendar month) and intraosseous use. RESULTS: We identified 75,343 adults in cardiac arrest treated by seven Emergency Medical Service systems between January 2015 and December 2020. The median age was 72 years, 64% were male and 23% presented in a shockable rhythm. Over the study period, the percentage of patients receiving intraosseous access increased from 22.8% in 2015 to 42.5% in 2020. For each study-month, the odds of receiving any intraosseous access increased by 1.019 (95% confidence interval 1.019 to 1.020, p < 0.001). This observed effect was consistent across sensitivity analyses. We observed a corresponding decrease in use of intravenous access. CONCLUSION: In England, the use of intraosseous access in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest has progressively increased over time. There is an urgent need for randomised controlled trials to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the different vascular access routes in cardiac arrest.

A multimodal intraosseous infusion of morphine and ketorolac decreases early postoperative pain and opioid consumption following total knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal pain management regimens and intraosseous infusion of morphine are two novel techniques that show promise in decreasing postoperative pain and opioid consumption following total knee arthroplasty. However, no study has analyzed the intraosseous infusion of a multimodal pain management regimen in this patient population. The purpose of our investigation was to examine the intraosseous administration of a multimodal pain regimen comprised of morphine and ketorolac during total knee arthroplasty with regard to immediate and 2-week postoperative pain, opioid pain medication intake, and nausea levels. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study with comparisons to a historical control group, 24 patients were prospectively enrolled to receive an intraosseous infusion of morphine and ketorolac dosed according to age-based protocols while undergoing total knee arthroplasty. Immediate and 2-week postoperative Visual Analog Score (VAS) pain scores, opioid pain medication intake, and nausea levels were recorded and compared against a historical control group that received an intraosseous infusion of morphine alone. RESULTS: During the first four postoperative hours, patients who received the multimodal intraosseous infusion experienced lower VAS pain scores and required less breakthrough intravenous pain medication than those patients in our historical control group. Following this immediate postoperative period, there were no additional differences between groups in terms of pain levels or opioid consumption, and there were no differences in nausea levels between groups at any time. CONCLUSIONS: Our multimodal intraosseous infusion of morphine and ketorolac dosed according to age-based protocols improved immediate postoperative pain levels and reduced opioid consumption in the immediate postoperative period for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.

Use of Intraosseous Access in Neonatal and Pediatric Retrieval-Neonatal and Pediatric Emergency Transfer Service, New South Wales.

OBJECTIVES: Pediatric patients who are critically unwell require rapid access to central vasculature for administration of life-saving medications and fluids. The intraosseous (IO) route is a well-described method of accessing the central circulation. There is a paucity of data surrounding the use of IO in neonatal and pediatric retrieval. The aim of this study was to review the frequency, complications, and efficacy of IO insertion in neonatal and pediatric patients in retrieval. METHODS: A retrospective review of cases referred to neonatal and pediatric emergency transfer service, New South Wales over the epoch 2006 to 2020. Medical records documenting IO use were audited for patient demographic data, diagnosis, treatment details, IO insertion and complication statistics, and mortality data. RESULTS: Intraosseous access was used in 467 patients (102 neonatal/365 pediatric). The most common indications were sepsis, respiratory distress, cardiac arrest, and encephalopathy. The main treatments were fluid bolus, antibiotics, maintenance fluids, and resuscitation drugs. Return of spontaneous circulation after resuscitation drugs occurred in 52.9%; perfusion improved with fluid bolus in 73.1%; blood pressure improved with inotropes in 63.2%; seizures terminated with anticonvulsants in 88.7%. Prostaglandin E1 was given to eight patients without effect. Intraosseous access-related injury occurred in 14.2% of pediatric and 10.8% of neonatal patients. Neonatal and pediatric mortality rates were 18.6% and 19.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Survival in retrieved neonatal and pediatric patients who required IO is higher than previously described in pediatric and adult cohorts. Early insertion of an IO facilitates early volume expansion, delivery of critical drugs, and allows time for retrieval teams to gain more definitive venous access. In this study, prostaglandin E1 delivered via a distal limb IO had no success in reopening the ductus arteriosus.

Self-Efficacy in the Cannulation Technique for Intraosseous Access in Pediatric Cardiac Arrest: Egg Versus Bone.

OBJECTIVES: The use of intraosseous (IO) access is recommended in cardiac arrest when peripheral venous access is not accessible. Various methodologies exist that are used for teaching and learning about cannulation of the IO route both in education and in research. The purpose of the present study was to compare self-efficacy in the cannulation technique for IO access through different techniques. METHODS: A randomized comparative study was conducted. A total of 118 nursing students participated. The participants were randomly distributed into 2 intervention groups: chicken bone and egg. A checklist was used for data collection to evaluate the IO cannulation technique in nursing students and another to analyze self-efficacy. RESULTS: The average total score of self-efficacy for all participants was 8.84 (standard deviation (SD) = 0.98). No statistically significant differences were found when comparing the total self-efficacy score and the intervention group ( U = 1604.500; z = -0.733; P = 0.463). No statistically significant differences were found between both groups for the average total score of the procedure ( U = 6916.500; z = -0.939; P = 0.348). The egg group carried out the IO cannulation procedure in a significantly less amount of time (M = 126.88, SD = 82.18) than the chicken bone group (M = 183.77, SD = 108.28), finding statistically significant differences ( U = 4983.500; z = -5.326; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Using an egg to teach and learn about IO access could be considered a methodology that is equally effective as using a chicken bone, with the advantage of achieving IO access in a lesser amount of time.

Finding the most suitable puncture site for intraosseous access in term and preterm neonates: an ultrasound-based anatomical pilot study.

The purpose of this prospective ultrasound-based pilot study was to identify the most suitable tibial puncture site for intraosseous (IO) access in term and preterm neonates, describe tibial dimensions at this site, and provide anatomical landmarks for rapid localization. We measured the tibial dimensions and distances to anatomical landmarks at puncture sites A (proximal: 10 mm distal to the tibial tuberosity; distal: 10 mm proximal to the malleolus medialis) and B (chosen by palpation of the pediatrician), in 40 newborns in four weight groups (< 1000 g; 1000-2000 g, 2000-3000 g, and 3000-4000 g). Sites were rejected if they fell short of the assumed safety distance to the tibial growth plate of 10 mm. If both A and B were rejected, puncture site C was determined sonographically at the maximum tibial diameter while maintaining the safety distance. Puncture site A violated the safety distance in 53% and 85% (proximally and distally, respectively) and puncture site B in 38% and 33%. In newborns weighing 3000-4000 g, at median (IQR), the most suitable puncture site at the proximal tibia was 13.0 mm (12.0-15.8) distal to the tuberosity and 6.0 mm (4.0-8.0) medial to the anterior rim of the tibia. The median (IQR) diameters at this site were 8.3 mm (7.9-9.1) (transverse) and 9.2 mm (8.9-9.8) (anterior-posterior). The diameters increased significantly with increasing weight.  Conclusion: This study adds concise, practical information on the implementation of IO access in neonatal patients: the tibial dimensions in newborns in four different weight groups and initial data on anatomical landmarks to easily locate the IO puncture site. The results may help implement IO access in newborns more safely. What is Known: • Intraosseous access is a feasible option for emergency administration of vital drugs and fluids in newborns undergoing resuscitation when an umbilical venous catheter is impossible to place. • Severe complications of IO access due to malpositioned IO needles have been reported in neonates. What is New: • This study reports the most suitable tibial puncture sites for IO access and the tibial dimensions, in newborns of four weight groups. • The results can help to implement safe IO access in newborns.

Intraosseous line insertion for the primary health care physician.

Early rapid access to the vascular system is essential in emergencies and is lifesaving. In this article, we will provide information on the common sites used, the equipment that is required, the indications and contraindications for intraosseous line insertion, how to correctly and safely do the procedure, medication that can be administered, post insertion line management and possible complications. This is a lifesaving procedure and primary healthcare physicians should acquire this skill.

Moving the needle on time to resuscitation: An EAST prospective multicenter study of vascular access in hypotensive injured patients using trauma video review.

BACKGROUND: Vascular access in hypotensive trauma patients is challenging. Little evidence exists on the time required and success rates of vascular access types. We hypothesized that intraosseous (IO) access would be faster and more successful than peripheral intravenous (PIV) and central venous catheter (CVC) access in hypotensive patients. METHODS: An EAST prospective multicenter trial was performed; 19 centers provided data. Trauma video review was used to evaluate the resuscitations of hypotensive (systolic blood pressure ≤90 mm Hg) trauma patients. Highly granular data from video recordings were abstracted. Data collected included vascular access attempt type, location, success rate, and procedural time. Demographic and injury-specific variables were obtained from the medical record. Success rates, procedural durations, and time to resuscitation were compared among access strategies (IO vs. PIV vs. CVC). RESULTS: There were 1,410 access attempts that occurred in 581 patients with a median age of 40 years (27-59 years) and an Injury Severity Score of 22 [10-34]. Nine hundred thirty-two PIV, 204 IO, and 249 CVC were attempted. Seventy percent of access attempts were successful but were significantly less likely to be successful in females (64% vs. 71%, p = 0.01). Median time to any access was 5.0 minutes (3.2-8.0 minutes). Intraosseous had higher success rates than PIV or CVC (93% vs. 67% vs. 59%, p < 0.001) and remained higher after subsequent failures (second attempt, 85% vs. 59% vs. 69%, p = 0.08; third attempt, 100% vs. 33% vs. 67%, p = 0.002). Duration varied by access type (IO, 36 [23-60] seconds; PIV, 44 [31-61] seconds; CVC 171 [105-298]seconds) and was significantly different between IO versus CVC ( p < 0.001) and PIV versus CVC ( p < 0.001) but not PIV versus IO. Time to resuscitation initiation was shorter in patients whose initial access attempt was IO, 5.8 minutes versus 6.7 minutes ( p = 0.015). This was more pronounced in patients arriving to the hospital with no established access (5.7 minutes vs. 7.5 minutes, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Intraosseous is as fast as PIV and more likely to be successful compared with other access strategies in hypotensive trauma patients. Patients whose initial access attempt was IO were resuscitated more expeditiously. Intraosseous access should be considered a first line therapy in hypotensive trauma patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level II.

Efficacy of intraosseous access for trauma resuscitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: During medical emergencies, intraosseous (IO) access and intravenous (IV) access are methods of administering therapies and medications to patients. Treating patients in emergency medical situations is a highly time sensitive practice; however, research into the optimal access method is limited and existing systematic reviews have only considered out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients. We focused on severe trauma patients and conducted a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and efficiency of intraosseous (IO) access compared to intravenous (IV) access for trauma resuscitation in prehospital care. MATERIALS AND METHOD: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, ScienceDirect, banque de données en santé publique and CNKI databases were searched for articles published between January 1, 2000, and January 31, 2023. Adult trauma patients were included, regardless of race, nationality, and region. OHCA patients and other types of patients were excluded. The experimental and control groups received IO and IV access, respectively, in the pre-hospital and emergency departments for salvage. The primary outcome was success rate on first attempt, which was defined as secure needle position in the marrow cavity or a peripheral vein, with normal fluid flow. Secondary outcomes included mean time to resuscitation, mean procedure time, and complications. RESULTS: Three reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies; meta-analyses were then performed using Review Manager (Version 5.4; Cochrane, Oxford, UK). The success rate on first attempt was significant higher for IO access than for IV access (RR = 1.46, 95% CI [1.16, 1.85], P = 0.001). The mean procedure time was significantly reduced (MD = - 5.67, 95% CI [- 9.26, - 2.07], P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in mean time to resuscitation (MD = - 1.00, 95% CI [- 3.18, 1.17], P = 0.37) and complications (RR = 1.22, 95% CI [0.14, 10.62], P = 0.86) between the IO and IV groups. CONCLUSION: The success rate on first attempt of IO access was much higher than that of IV access for trauma patients, and the mean procedure time of IO access was significantly less when compared to IV access. Therefore, IO access should be suggested as an urgent vascular access for hypotensive trauma patients, especially those who are under severe shock.