Comparison of placement characteristics using two intraosseous devices in canine and feline cadavers by novice users
IntroductionIntraosseous (IO) catheterization enables rapid access to systemic circulation in critical patients. A battery-powered IO device (BPIO) utilized in veterinary practice is reliable in facilitating IO catheter placement. A new spring-powered IO device (SPIO) has been developed for people b...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023-07-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Veterinary Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2023.1196284/full |
| _version_ | 1797776532512440320 |
|---|---|
| author | Olivia C. Uzan Liz S. Guieu Kelly E. Hall Claire D. Tucker Tracy L. Webb Julie Dunn Julien Guillaumin |
| author_facet | Olivia C. Uzan Liz S. Guieu Kelly E. Hall Claire D. Tucker Tracy L. Webb Julie Dunn Julien Guillaumin |
| author_sort | Olivia C. Uzan |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | IntroductionIntraosseous (IO) catheterization enables rapid access to systemic circulation in critical patients. A battery-powered IO device (BPIO) utilized in veterinary practice is reliable in facilitating IO catheter placement. A new spring-powered IO device (SPIO) has been developed for people but has not been tested in veterinary patients. The goal of our study was to compare placement characteristics and flow rates achieved with the BPIO compared to the SPIO in animals when operated by novice users.MethodsSix veterinary students performed 72 catheterizations in the humeri and tibias of 12 dog and 6 cat cadavers. The user, cadaver, device, and site of placement were randomized. Flow rates were determined by three-minute infusions.ResultsIn dogs, overall success rates (50% BPIO, 46% SPIO; p = 0.775) and flow rates based on location were similar between devices. Successful placement was faster on average with the BPIO (34.4 s for BPIO and 55.0 s for SPIO, p = 0.0392). However, time to successful placement between devices was not statistically significant based on location (humerus: 34.7 s for BPIO and 43.1 s for SPIO, p = 0.3329; tibia: 33.3 s for BPIO and 132.6 s for SPIO, p = 0.1153). In cats, success rates were similar between devices (16.7% for BPIO and 16.7% for SPIO, p = 1.000), but limited successful placements prevented further analysis.DiscussionThis is the first study to examine the use of the SPIO in animals, providing preliminary data for future IO studies and potential applications for training in the clinical setting. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T22:51:21Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-bbc7b4f6be3d4205a1ced538e40a42b9 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2297-1769 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T22:51:21Z |
| publishDate | 2023-07-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Veterinary Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-bbc7b4f6be3d4205a1ced538e40a42b92023-07-20T11:40:05ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Veterinary Science2297-17692023-07-011010.3389/fvets.2023.11962841196284Comparison of placement characteristics using two intraosseous devices in canine and feline cadavers by novice usersOlivia C. Uzan0Liz S. Guieu1Kelly E. Hall2Claire D. Tucker3Tracy L. Webb4Julie Dunn5Julien Guillaumin6Department of Clinical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United StatesDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United StatesDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United StatesDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United StatesDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United StatesMedical Center of the Rockies, University of Colorado Health, Loveland, CO, United StatesDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United StatesIntroductionIntraosseous (IO) catheterization enables rapid access to systemic circulation in critical patients. A battery-powered IO device (BPIO) utilized in veterinary practice is reliable in facilitating IO catheter placement. A new spring-powered IO device (SPIO) has been developed for people but has not been tested in veterinary patients. The goal of our study was to compare placement characteristics and flow rates achieved with the BPIO compared to the SPIO in animals when operated by novice users.MethodsSix veterinary students performed 72 catheterizations in the humeri and tibias of 12 dog and 6 cat cadavers. The user, cadaver, device, and site of placement were randomized. Flow rates were determined by three-minute infusions.ResultsIn dogs, overall success rates (50% BPIO, 46% SPIO; p = 0.775) and flow rates based on location were similar between devices. Successful placement was faster on average with the BPIO (34.4 s for BPIO and 55.0 s for SPIO, p = 0.0392). However, time to successful placement between devices was not statistically significant based on location (humerus: 34.7 s for BPIO and 43.1 s for SPIO, p = 0.3329; tibia: 33.3 s for BPIO and 132.6 s for SPIO, p = 0.1153). In cats, success rates were similar between devices (16.7% for BPIO and 16.7% for SPIO, p = 1.000), but limited successful placements prevented further analysis.DiscussionThis is the first study to examine the use of the SPIO in animals, providing preliminary data for future IO studies and potential applications for training in the clinical setting.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2023.1196284/fullintraosseousdogcatboneIO catheterEZIO |
| spellingShingle | Olivia C. Uzan Liz S. Guieu Kelly E. Hall Claire D. Tucker Tracy L. Webb Julie Dunn Julien Guillaumin Comparison of placement characteristics using two intraosseous devices in canine and feline cadavers by novice users Frontiers in Veterinary Science intraosseous dog cat bone IO catheter EZIO |
| title | Comparison of placement characteristics using two intraosseous devices in canine and feline cadavers by novice users |
| title_full | Comparison of placement characteristics using two intraosseous devices in canine and feline cadavers by novice users |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of placement characteristics using two intraosseous devices in canine and feline cadavers by novice users |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of placement characteristics using two intraosseous devices in canine and feline cadavers by novice users |
| title_short | Comparison of placement characteristics using two intraosseous devices in canine and feline cadavers by novice users |
| title_sort | comparison of placement characteristics using two intraosseous devices in canine and feline cadavers by novice users |
| topic | intraosseous dog cat bone IO catheter EZIO |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2023.1196284/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT oliviacuzan comparisonofplacementcharacteristicsusingtwointraosseousdevicesincanineandfelinecadaversbynoviceusers AT lizsguieu comparisonofplacementcharacteristicsusingtwointraosseousdevicesincanineandfelinecadaversbynoviceusers AT kellyehall comparisonofplacementcharacteristicsusingtwointraosseousdevicesincanineandfelinecadaversbynoviceusers AT clairedtucker comparisonofplacementcharacteristicsusingtwointraosseousdevicesincanineandfelinecadaversbynoviceusers AT tracylwebb comparisonofplacementcharacteristicsusingtwointraosseousdevicesincanineandfelinecadaversbynoviceusers AT juliedunn comparisonofplacementcharacteristicsusingtwointraosseousdevicesincanineandfelinecadaversbynoviceusers AT julienguillaumin comparisonofplacementcharacteristicsusingtwointraosseousdevicesincanineandfelinecadaversbynoviceusers |