Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 58, Issue 6 , Pages 509-516, December 2011

Intraosseous Versus Intravenous Vascular Access During Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Randomized Controlled Trial

  • Rosalyn Reades, MD

      Affiliations

    • Methodist Hospital System, Dallas, TX
  • ,
  • Jonathan R. Studnek, PhD, NREMT-P

      Affiliations

    • Carolinas Medical Center and the Center for Prehospital Medicine, Charlotte, NC
    • Mecklenburg EMS Agency, Charlotte, NC
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress for correspondence: Jonathan R. Studnek, PhD, NREMT-P
  • ,
  • Steven Vandeventer, EMT-P

      Affiliations

    • Mecklenburg EMS Agency, Charlotte, NC
  • ,
  • John Garrett, MD

      Affiliations

    • Baylor Healthcare Systems, Department of Emergency Medicine, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX

Received 15 April 2011; received in revised form 9 June 2011, 23 June 2011 and 8 July 2011; accepted 14 July 2011. published online 19 August 2011.

Study objective

Intraosseous needle insertion during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is rapidly replacing peripheral intravenous routes in the out-of-hospital setting. However, there are few data directly comparing the effectiveness of intraosseous needle insertions with peripheral intravenous insertions during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The objective of this study is to determine whether there is a difference in the frequency of first-attempt success between humeral intraosseous, tibial intraosseous, and peripheral intravenous insertions during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Methods

This was a randomized trial of adult patients experiencing a nontraumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in which resuscitation efforts were initiated. Patients were randomized to one of 3 routes of vascular access: tibial intraosseous, humeral intraosseous, or peripheral intravenous. Paramedics received intensive training and exposure to all 3 methods before study initiation. The primary outcome was first-attempt success, defined as secure needle position in the marrow cavity or a peripheral vein, with normal fluid flow. Needle dislodgement during resuscitation was coded as a failure to maintain vascular access.

Results

There were 182 patients enrolled, with 64 (35%) assigned to tibial intraosseous, 51 (28%) humeral intraosseous, and 67 (37%) peripheral intravenous access. Demographic characteristics were similar among patients in the 3 study arms. There were 130 (71%) patients who experienced initial vascular access success, with 17 (9%) needles becoming dislodged, for an overall frequency of first-attempt success of 113 (62%). Individuals randomized to tibial intraosseous access were more likely to experience a successful first attempt at vascular access (91%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 83% to 98%) compared with either humeral intraosseous access (51%; 95% CI 37% to 65%) or peripheral intravenous access (43%; 95% CI 31% to 55%) groups. Time to initial success was significantly shorter for individuals assigned to the tibial intraosseous access group (4.6 minutes; interquartile range 3.6 to 6.2 minutes) compared with those assigned to the humeral intraosseous access group (7.0 minutes; interquartile range 3.9 to 10.0 minutes), and neither time was significantly different from that of the peripheral intravenous access group (5.8 minutes; interquartile range 4.1 to 8.0 minutes).

Conclusion

Tibial intraosseous access was found to have the highest first-attempt success for vascular access and the most rapid time to vascular access during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest compared with peripheral intravenous and humeral intraosseous access.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article as per ICMJE conflict of interest guidelines (see www.icmje.org). The authors have stated that no such relationships exist.

 Supervising editor: Keith A. Marill, MD

 Author contributions: RR, JRS, SV, and JG conceived the study and designed the trial. RR, JRS, and SV supervised the conduct of the trial and data collection. JRS and SV managed the data, including quality control. JRS provided statistical advice on study design and analyzed the data. RR and JRS drafted the article, and all authors contributed substantially to its revision. RR takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.

 Please see page 510 for the Editor's Capsule Summary of this article.

 Provide feedback on this article at the journal's Web site, www.annemergmed.com.

 A podcast for this article is available at www.annemergmed.com.

 Publication date: Available online August 18, 2011.

PII: S0196-0644(11)01336-9

doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.07.020

Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 58, Issue 6 , Pages 509-516, December 2011