Quantitative Assessment of Injectable Medication Delivery Practices

BackgroundWhile medical advances for in-hospital care rapidly evolve, a mainstay of effective pre-hospital care remains the ability to treat medical emergencies such as anaphylaxis, overdosing, and/or uncontrolled bleeding through rapid administration of appropriate medication. Therefore, investigators looked at various injection methods and their possible utility in medical emergencies. Method30 participants were asked to inject medication that mimicked three different methods of injection: 1) autoinjectors, 2) prefilled syringes, and 3) traditional standard syringes using clinical scenarios. Three variables that were measured in the study were: the time required to complete the injection, the perceived difficulties, and the participants performance errors. ResultsThe perceived difficulty and injection time for the autoinjector device were statistically significantly lower compared to prefilled syringes and standard syringes. No significant difference in errors were seen between platforms. DiscussionTo our knowledge, this is the first study to quantify the gain of efficiency when comparing autoinjectors to other methods of medication administration, like prefilled syringes or drawing medication from vials for administration. The clinical implications of the noted differences are not clear at this time. Many potential limitations exist, including the size of the study, the use of non-clinical participants, the immediate use of platforms after training, and the lack of applied stress in the environment. ConclusionThis study compares autoinjectors to other methods of medication administration; prefilled syringes and standard syringes. Further study in larger datasets with clinicians and/or military personnel is required to compare these platforms in various environments. The outcome of this project provides insights into the relative efficiencies of treating medical emergencies such as anaphylaxis, overdosing, and/or uncontrolled bleeding.