BACKGROUND: Intraosseous infusion (IOI) is recommended when intravenous access cannot be readily established in both pediatric and adult resuscitation. We evaluated the current use of IOI in Danish emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: An online questionnaire was e-mailed to the Heads of Department of the twenty EDs currently established in Denmark. The questionnaire focused on the use of IOI in the EDs and included questions on frequency of use, training, equipment and attitudes towards IOI. RESULTS: We received a total of 19 responses (response rate of 95%). Of the responding 19 Danish EDs 74% (n = 14) reported having intraosseous devices available. The median number of IOI procedures performed in these departments over the preceding 12 months was 5.0 (range: 0-45). In 47% (n = 9) of the departments, prior training sessions in the use of intraosseous devices had not been provided, and 42% (n = 8) did not have local guidelines on IOI. The indication for IOI use was often not clearly defined and only 11% (n = 2) consistently used IOI on relevant indication. This is surprising as 95% (n = 18) of responders were aware that IOI can be utilized in both pediatric and adult resuscitation. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows considerable variations in IOI usage in Danish EDs despite the fact that IOI devices were available in the majority of EDs. In addition, in many EDs there were no local guidelines on IOI and no training in the procedure. We recommend more extensive training of medical staff in IOI techniques in Danish EDs.
BACKGROUND: Intraosseous infusion (IOI) is recommended when intravenous access cannot be readily established in both pediatric and adult resuscitation. We evaluated the current use of IOI in Danish emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: An online questionnaire was e-mailed to the Heads of Department of the twenty EDs currently established in Denmark. The questionnaire focused on the use of IOI in the EDs and included questions on frequency of use, training, equipment and attitudes towards IOI. RESULTS: We received a total of 19 responses (response rate of 95%). Of the responding 19 Danish EDs 74% (n = 14) reported having intraosseous devices available. The median number of IOI procedures performed in these departments over the preceding 12 months was 5.0 (range: 0-45). In 47% (n = 9) of the departments, prior training sessions in the use of intraosseous devices had not been provided, and 42% (n = 8) did not have local guidelines on IOI. The indication for IOI use was often not clearly defined and only 11% (n = 2) consistently used IOI on relevant indication. This is surprising as 95% (n = 18) of responders were aware that IOI can be utilized in both pediatric and adult resuscitation. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows considerable variations in IOI usage in Danish EDs despite the fact that IOI devices were available in the majority of EDs. In addition, in many EDs there were no local guidelines on IOI and no training in the procedure. We recommend more extensive training of medical staff in IOI techniques in Danish EDs.
Authors: Geir A Sunde; Bård E Heradstveit; Bjarne H Vikenes; Jon K Heltne Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2010-10-07 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Richard Schalk; Uwe Schweigkofler; Gösta Lotz; Kai Zacharowski; Leo Latasch; Christian Byhahn Journal: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Date: 2011-10-26 Impact factor: 2.953