Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 54, Issue 5 , Pages 692-694, November 2009

Use of a Battery-Operated Needle Driver for Intraosseous Access by Novice Users: Skill Acquisition With Cadavers

  • Richard M. Levitan, MD

      Affiliations

    • Albert Einstein Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress for correspondence: Richard M. Levitan, MD, Albert Einstein Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, 5501 Old York Road, Philadelphia, PA 19141; Fax 610-341-1866
  • ,
  • Charles D. Bortle, MEd, RRT-NPS

      Affiliations

    • Albert Einstein Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
  • ,
  • Thomas A. Snyder, EMT-P

      Affiliations

    • Albert Einstein Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
  • ,
  • David A. Nitsch, EMT-P

      Affiliations

    • Albert Einstein Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
  • ,
  • James T. Pisaturo, EMT-P

      Affiliations

    • Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Department of Emergency Medicine, Philadelphia, PA
  • ,
  • Kenneth H. Butler, DO

      Affiliations

    • University of Maryland Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Baltimore, MD

Received 4 May 2009; accepted 1 June 2009. published online 30 July 2009.

Study objectives

We determine skill acquisition and performance by using a battery-operated, intraosseous needle driver in cadavers.

Methods

This was a prospective study of the EZ-IO, a battery-operated intraosseous needle driver (Vidacare Corp). Operators received a 5-minute presentation (with 1 insertion demonstration) and then performed 3 tibial insertions on a cadaver. Insertion time was measured from skin placement until stylet removal. Another participant recorded the time and determination of “success.” Success required stable bone position and infusion of fluid without extravasation. After testing, operators completed a questionnaire including ease of use (1 to 5; 1=very difficult, 5=very easy), speed versus central line (faster, same, slower), ease of use versus a central line (easier, same, harder), and willingness to use the device in future cardiac arrest situations (yes, maybe, no).

Results

Operators included 42 emergency medicine attending physicians, 13 other physicians, 31 emergency medicine residents, and 13 nonphysicians (emergency medical services, etc). None had previous experience with the EZ-IO, and 80 of 99 (80.8%) had never placed an intraosseous needle. Two hundred eighty-nine of 297 insertions (97.3%) were successful. Success rates for the first, second, and third insertion were 96.9%, 94.9%, and 100%, respectively. Median insertion time was 6 seconds (range 3 to 25 seconds), with interquartile range 5 to 8 seconds. The mean ease of use rating was 4.8 (95% confidence interval 4.70 to 4.90). All operators subjectively rated the device faster and easier than a central line; 98 of 99 (99%) expressed willingness to use the device in a cardiac arrest.

Conclusion

The EZ-IO requires minimal training, is easy to use, and is fast. Skill acquisition is rapid, with a high success rate on the initial insertion after a brief training session and a single demonstration.

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.
 

 Supervising editor: Kathy J. Rinnert, MD, MPH

 Author contributions: RML conceived the study, designed the trial, and obtained equipment. RML, CDB, and KHB collaborated on the article and were responsible for statistical analysis. RML and CDB collaborated on background research and were responsible for conclusions. CDB was the principal investigator. CDB, TAS, and DAN collected data. TAS, DAN, and KHB were responsible for quality control. JTP was responsible for laboratory and equipment management. JTP and KHB were responsible for general oversight. RML takes responsibility for the paper as a whole.

 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 that might create any potential conflict of interest. See the Manuscript Submission Agreement in this issue for examples of specific conflicts covered by this statement. EZ-IO needle drivers and needles were supplied by the manufacturer, Vidacare, Inc., free of charge. No representative of Vidacare participated in the study in any way or reviewed the study data or article.

 Publication date: Available online July 29, 2009.

 Reprints not available from the authors.

PII: S0196-0644(09)00643-X

doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2009.06.012

Annals of Emergency Medicine
Volume 54, Issue 5 , Pages 692-694, November 2009