Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-17T01:24:53.292Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rapid Volume Infusion in Prehospital Care

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Steven J. Rottman ,
Baxter Larmon  and
Tom Manix
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The ability to deliver large volumes of intravenous (IV) fluids may be critical to the successful prehospital resuscitation of hypovolemic patients. We compared the time required to deliver one liter of crystalloid solution, using an administration set-up consisting of a 16-guage (g), 1.25 inch, intravenous cannula, a pneumatic pressure bag, and either conventional intravenous tubing (3.2 mm internal diameter [ID]) or large bore (4.4 mm internal diameter [ID]) “shock” tubing. With the fluid bag positioned at 110cm (46 inches) above the level of the cannula, the mean elapsed time to deliver 1,000ml using the conventional tubing set-up was 6.0 minutes, while the same volume could be delivered in only 2.7 minutes with the shock tubing configuration. This time was reduced to 1.8 minutes when the intravenous cannula size was increased to 14g. By attaching a liter of fluid to each arm of the “Y” adapter of the shock tubing, virtually uninterrupted fluid flow may be maintained at this rate. We feel this intravenous configuration could enhance greatly the ability of paramedics to provide fluid resuscitation in the field setting. When such IVs are established en route to a receiving hospital, this technique may prove to be an important adjunct to improving patient outcome from hypovolemic shock.

Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , September 1990 , pp. 225 - 229
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. McSwain, GR, Garrison, WB, Artz, CP: Evaluation of resuscitation from cardiopulmonary arrest by paramedics. Ann Emerg Med 1980;9:341–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Cwinn, AA, Pons, PT, Moore, EE et al. , Prehospital advanced trauma life support for critical blunt trauma victims. Ann Emerg Med 1987;16:399–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Feldman, R: IV line placement: A time study for prehospital providers. JEMS 1986;43–45.Google Scholar
4. McSwain, NE in Lewis, RE: Prehospital intravenous fluid therapy: Physiologic computer modeling. J Trauma 1986;26:809.Google Scholar
5. Jones, SE, Nesper, TP, Alcouloumre, E: Prehospital intravenous line placement: A prospective study. Ann Emerg Med 1989;18:244–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Lewis, FR, Aprahamian, C, Haller, JA et al. , Panel: Prehospital trauma care—stabilize or scoop and run. J Trauma 1983;23:708–711.Google Scholar
7. Millikan, JS, Cain, TL, Hansbrough, J: Rapid volume replacement for hypovolemic shock: A comparison of techniques and equipment. J Trauma 1984;24:428–431.Google ScholarPubMed
8. Sadler, R, Eisner, ME, Waxman, K, et al. , Comparative flow rates of intravenous catheters. Military Medicine 1984;149:415–416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Iserson, KV, Reeter, AK, Criss, E: Comparison of flow rates for standard and large-bore blood tubing. West J Med 1985;143:183–185.Google ScholarPubMed
10. Lewis, FR: Prehospital intravenous fluid therapy: Physiologic modeling. J Trauma 1986;26:809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Gervin, AS: Peripheral large-bore IV lines by prehospital providers. Ann Emerg Med 1988;17:880 (abstract).Google Scholar
12. Collicott, PE, Aprahamian, C, Carrico, CJ, et al. Advanced Trauma Life Support Course: Instructor Manual. American College of Surgeons, 1984. 179–191.Google Scholar