EZ-IO in the ED: an observational, prospective study comparing flow rates with proximal and distal tibia intraosseous access in adults☆
Affiliations
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, 169608 Singapore
Correspondence
- Corresponding author. Tel.: +65 63213590; fax: +65 63214873.

Affiliations
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, 169608 Singapore
Correspondence
- Corresponding author. Tel.: +65 63213590; fax: +65 63214873.

Affiliations
- Department of Clinical Research, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, 169608 Singapore
Affiliations
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, 169608 Singapore
Affiliations
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, 169608 Singapore
Article Info
To view the full text, please login as a subscribed user or purchase a subscription. Click here to view the full text on ScienceDirect.
Fig. 1
Equipment used in this study.
Fig. 2
Location of proximal tibia site for EZ-IO placement.
Fig. 3
Location of distal tibia site for EZ-IO placement.
Abstract
Introduction
Intraosseous (IO) access is an important alternative to conventional intravenous access when intravenous access is difficult.
Methods
A nonrandomized, prospective, observational study comparing flow rates with distal and proximal tibia IO access in adults using the EZ-IO–powered drill device. The proximal tibia was the first site of insertion, and a second IO was inserted in the distal tibia if clinically indicated. Intravenous saline infusion was started for all patients, initially without, then with a pressure bag device applied.
Results
From September 19, 2008 to November 3, 2010, 22 patients were recruited, with 20 proximal tibial and 22 distal tibia insertions. Two patients had only distal tibia IO insertions. Five distal tibia and 3 proximal tibia insertions had no flow when initiating normal saline infusion without pressure. Upon comparing the mean flow rates without pressure bag, it is significantly faster in the proximal tibia, 4.96 mL/min, compared with distal tibia, 2.07 ml/min, difference of 2.89 ml/min (95% CI 1.20-4.58). Flow rates with pressure bags also revealed a similar result. Flow rates in the proximal tibia were significantly faster, 7.70 ml/min to that of distal tibia, 3.80 ml/min, difference of 3.89 ml/min (95% CI 1.68-6.10). In both proximal and distal tibia groups, the flow rates are also significantly faster with pressure bags compared with without.
Conclusion
Flow rates are significantly faster in the proximal tibia compared with the distal tibia. In addition, flow rates with pressure bags are significantly faster than without pressure bags in both groups.
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Purchase access to this article
Claim Access
If you are a current subscriber with Society Membership or an Account Number, claim your access now.
Subscribe to this title
Purchase a subscription to gain access to this and all other articles in this journal.
Institutional Access
Visit ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
☆Source of support: We acknowledge the support of Vidacare Corporation, San Antonio, TX, in providing the EZ-IO devices used in this study. A small cash sponsorship (<$10 000) was used to support manpower for this study.
Related Articles
Searching for related articles..
