trauma_junky

12 step pre-med rehab
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Jul 3, 2003
1,141
2
42
Visit site
Status
Check this thing out guys. Vascular access is no longer an issue in your hemodynamically comprimised paitents. Access in under 6 seconds!Adult IO Drill
 

PlayHard

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Jan 26, 2005
15
0
Status
trauma_junky said:
Check this thing out guys. Vascular access is no longer an issue in your hemodynamically comprimised paitents. Access in under 6 seconds!Adult IO Drill
That is awsome!
 

beyond all hope

Senior Member
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Dec 18, 2003
623
7
45
Visit site
Status
The israelis have used sternal IO successfully for massive transfusions and rescus. Tibial IO is also good. Need more research to show it's safe and effective in adults.
 

Doczilla

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Jan 7, 2005
146
3
Stomping Tokyo to ruins
Status
I've played with the FAST and thought it was pretty cool. Easy to understand and use, somewhat idiot-resistant, etc.

It looks like a good tool for prehospital use and ED use. As far as combat operations are concerned, there's the issue of having available IV fluid to put through the IO. Probably less useful to the SOF medics who tested them out in the article, since it is prohibitively difficult to carry sufficient resuscitation fluid on a mission in an already full pack.

FAST1
http://www.pyng.com/pym/products/description.htm

I have had difficulty locating websites for the other items mentioned in the article below.

'zilla


Intraosseous Infusion Devices: A Comparison for Potential Use in Special Operations.
Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection & Critical Care. 48(6):1068-1074, June 2000.
Calkins, Mark D. MD; Fitzgerald, Geoff MD; Bentley, Timothy B. PhD; Burris, David MD
Abstract:
Objective: To determine which intraosseous (IO) devices were easy to learn to use, easy to use once the skill was obtained, and appropriate for the Special Operations environment.

Methods: Thirty-one Navy SEAL corpsmen, Air Force pararescuemen, Army Special Forces, and Ranger medics, in a prospective, randomly assigned, cross-over study, tested four commercially available, Food and Drug Administration-cleared IO devices. The systems included the injection models First Access for Shock and Trauma (FAST, Pyng Medical) and Bone Injection Gun (Wais Medical, Kress USA Corporation) and the hand-driven threaded-needle SurFast (Cook Critical Care) and straight-needle Jamshidi needle (Baxter) models. The Special Operations medical care providers received a lecture regarding IO use, viewed videotapes of the injection models, and practiced with demonstration units in the classroom. Each participant then entered the cadaver lab where all four of the IO devices were placed in randomly assigned order. A poststudy questionnaire was then completed. The FAST was placed in the sternum, whereas the other units were placed in either medial proximal or distal medial tibia. Each participant was assessed for time, number of attempts, and success. The presence of marrow, extravasation, quality of flow, and security of needle were evaluated in combination to help determine success.

Results: All four devices were believed to be easy to learn as well as easy to place. FAST was successful in 29 of 30 insertions (94%) with a placement time of 114 +/- 36 (mean +/- SD) seconds. The Bone Injection Gun was similarly successful (29 of 31 insertions, 94%) with a mean placement time of 70 +/- 33 seconds. This time was statistically significantly faster (p < 0.05) than that with FAST, but not with the other devices. Thirty of 31 SurFast placements (97%) were successful, on average taking 88 +/- 33 seconds to place. The Jamshidi needle also had 30 of 31 successful placements (97%) at an average 90 +/- 59 seconds. No one device was rated by the participants as significantly better than the others; however, the Bone Injection Gun did have 65% of participants rate it as first or second (closest was Jamshidi needle at 52%).

Conclusion: These IO devices were easy to teach and learn as well as easy to use. Insertion times compared favorably with peripheral intravenous catheter placement in the face of hemorrhage. All four devices can be appropriately used in the Special Operations environment and are reasonable alternatives when intravenous access cannot be gained. Although no device was rated higher than the others, particular features are desirable (low weight/size, simplicity, reusability, secure, clean, well protected).

(C) 2000 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.



Bone Injection Gun (BIG)
 
OP
trauma_junky

trauma_junky

12 step pre-med rehab
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Jul 3, 2003
1,141
2
42
Visit site
Status
Doczilla said:
I've played with the FAST and thought it was pretty cool. Easy to understand and use, somewhat idiot-resistant, etc.

It looks like a good tool for prehospital use and ED use. As far as combat operations are concerned, there's the issue of having available IV fluid to put through the IO. Probably less useful to the SOF medics who tested them out in the article, since it is prohibitively difficult to carry sufficient resuscitation fluid on a mission in an already full pack.

FAST1
http://www.pyng.com/pym/products/description.htm

I have had difficulty locating websites for the other items mentioned in the article below.

'zilla


Intraosseous Infusion Devices: A Comparison for Potential Use in Special Operations.
Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection & Critical Care. 48(6):1068-1074, June 2000.
Calkins, Mark D. MD; Fitzgerald, Geoff MD; Bentley, Timothy B. PhD; Burris, David MD
Abstract:
Objective: To determine which intraosseous (IO) devices were easy to learn to use, easy to use once the skill was obtained, and appropriate for the Special Operations environment.

Methods: Thirty-one Navy SEAL corpsmen, Air Force pararescuemen, Army Special Forces, and Ranger medics, in a prospective, randomly assigned, cross-over study, tested four commercially available, Food and Drug Administration-cleared IO devices. The systems included the injection models First Access for Shock and Trauma (FAST, Pyng Medical) and Bone Injection Gun (Wais Medical, Kress USA Corporation) and the hand-driven threaded-needle SurFast (Cook Critical Care) and straight-needle Jamshidi needle (Baxter) models. The Special Operations medical care providers received a lecture regarding IO use, viewed videotapes of the injection models, and practiced with demonstration units in the classroom. Each participant then entered the cadaver lab where all four of the IO devices were placed in randomly assigned order. A poststudy questionnaire was then completed. The FAST was placed in the sternum, whereas the other units were placed in either medial proximal or distal medial tibia. Each participant was assessed for time, number of attempts, and success. The presence of marrow, extravasation, quality of flow, and security of needle were evaluated in combination to help determine success.

Results: All four devices were believed to be easy to learn as well as easy to place. FAST was successful in 29 of 30 insertions (94%) with a placement time of 114 +/- 36 (mean +/- SD) seconds. The Bone Injection Gun was similarly successful (29 of 31 insertions, 94%) with a mean placement time of 70 +/- 33 seconds. This time was statistically significantly faster (p < 0.05) than that with FAST, but not with the other devices. Thirty of 31 SurFast placements (97%) were successful, on average taking 88 +/- 33 seconds to place. The Jamshidi needle also had 30 of 31 successful placements (97%) at an average 90 +/- 59 seconds. No one device was rated by the participants as significantly better than the others; however, the Bone Injection Gun did have 65% of participants rate it as first or second (closest was Jamshidi needle at 52%).

Conclusion: These IO devices were easy to teach and learn as well as easy to use. Insertion times compared favorably with peripheral intravenous catheter placement in the face of hemorrhage. All four devices can be appropriately used in the Special Operations environment and are reasonable alternatives when intravenous access cannot be gained. Although no device was rated higher than the others, particular features are desirable (low weight/size, simplicity, reusability, secure, clean, well protected).

(C) 2000 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.



Bone Injection Gun (BIG)
5 successful insertions in Iraq already. There are tons of studies on its efficacy and ease of use. Orlowski published a study showing how IO is statistically similar to Central line and better than Peripheral IV. The ez-io has a its 250 insertions summerized on its web site under the research section. I have personally used the EZ-IO, BIG and FAST 1. The EZ-IO is by far the best option. I like its user controllability (if that is a word), the Impact is miniml (remember physics in pre-med... I=(F*d)/t) this translates to less micro fractures in surrounding bone, a more defined border with less extrasfasation (once again sp?) from arond the catheter and into the superficial tissue. IT has been used on the rapid infussior as well with decent results. This device is responsible for the removal of Central Line from the flight service scope of practive in Flordia. At the Eagles confereince in Dallas last week, they were all very impressed with the device and it will soon be a standard of care in EM and EMS. Look for it a LAC-USC and Vanderbilt ED's.
 

12R34Y

10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Apr 5, 2000
1,678
2
Visit site
Status
Attending Physician
trauma_junky said:
5 successful insertions in Iraq already. There are tons of studies on its efficacy and ease of use. Orlowski published a study showing how IO is statistically similar to Central line and better than Peripheral IV. The ez-io has a its 250 insertions summerized on its web site under the research section. I have personally used the EZ-IO, BIG and FAST 1. The EZ-IO is by far the best option. I like its user controllability (if that is a word), the Impact is miniml (remember physics in pre-med... I=(F*d)/t) this translates to less micro fractures in surrounding bone, a more defined border with less extrasfasation (once again sp?) from arond the catheter and into the superficial tissue. IT has been used on the rapid infussior as well with decent results. This device is responsible for the removal of Central Line from the flight service scope of practive in Flordia. At the Eagles confereince in Dallas last week, they were all very impressed with the device and it will soon be a standard of care in EM and EMS. Look for it a LAC-USC and Vanderbilt ED's.
do you sell these by chance?
 
OP
trauma_junky

trauma_junky

12 step pre-med rehab
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Jul 3, 2003
1,141
2
42
Visit site
Status
12R34Y said:
do you sell these by chance?
I was in their focus group, no interest in the company financially at all.
 

ekydrd

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Oct 14, 2004
465
1
Louisville KY
Status
Resident [Any Field]
trauma_junky said:
Check this thing out guys. Vascular access is no longer an issue in your hemodynamically comprimised paitents. Access in under 6 seconds!Adult IO Drill

Cool!!! power tools!!!! :thumbup: