ArticleSAGE open medicine2024
Retrospective observational study of safety, performance, and duration of use of battery-powered intraosseous access device in pediatric patients.
Article in SAGE open medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To demonstrate the safety and performance of the Arrow EZ-IO Intraosseous Vascular Access System, particularly in the pediatric patient population, a retrospective observational study was conducted in 2021 and 2022. Methods: Following study design, IRB approval, and investigator selection, data were collected for all patients needing intraosseous access-adult and pediatric. The primary endpoint was the success rate for achieving intraosseous access; the secondary endpoint was the rate of adverse events. Following initial data collection, additional data were collected and a sub-set analysis was conducted to demonstrate the same in pediatric patients only, which is the focus of this report. Results: Data for 106 pediatric cases were collected. The success rate for achieving intraosseous access and infusion was 96.2%. There were three adverse events in two patients (1.9%); none serious or previously unreported. The mean duration of device use was 60 h (SD = 46). For 46 patients, the device was used for up to 48 h, and for another 45 patients, the device was used for a longer duration. Conclusions: This report is the first characterization of the safety and performance of the Arrow EZ-IO Intraosseous Vascular Access System when used in the pediatric population for longer dwell times (>24 h), with no serious complications reported. Performance and safety objectives were met. The results of this real-world evidence study are in alignment with findings from the clinical literature concluding that, for pediatric patients, the Arrow EZ-IO Intraosseous Vascular Access System is safe and effective for providing vascular access in urgent, emergent, and medically necessary situations, in which intravenous access is difficult or impossible to obtain. In addition, this study supports the use of intraosseous access for dwell times greater than 24 h.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.