A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Effect of epinephrine autoinjector design on unintentional injection injury. | LitMetric

Epinephrine is an essential medication for the treatment of anaphylaxis. Factors associated with autoinjector design may have a role in its correct use. We compared a new and old epinephrine autoinjector with respect to correct autoinjector use. We invited all interns of the 2011-2012 training period in our medical school. The participants were randomly assigned into two groups. After all participants were given a three-step written and visual instruction sheet about epinephrine autoinjector use, they were asked to show its use either with the old or the new epinephrine autoinjector trainer. The old and new trainers, which were exactly identical to the original epinephrine autoinjectors except for the medication and needle, were used. The performance of each participant was assessed with a standardized scoring system. Among 220 invited interns, 180 (81.8%) were enrolled. The number of participants correctly showing the use of epinephrine autoinjectors and the mean total score did not differ significantly between the two groups (p = 0.639 and p = 0.233, respectively). Significantly fewer participants had unintentional injections in the new compared with the old epinephrine autoinjector group (p < 0.001). When all assessment steps are considered, only the rate of placing a wrong tip into the outer thigh was significantly lower in the new compared with the old epinephrine autoinjector group (p < 0.05). The new epinephrine autoinjector is more effective in unintentional injection injuries than the old one; however, it still does not fulfill the criteria of an ideal epinephrine autoinjector.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2500/aap.2012.33.3609DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

epinephrine autoinjector
32
compared epinephrine
12
epinephrine
11
autoinjector
9
autoinjector design
8
unintentional injection
8
invited interns
8
epinephrine autoinjectors
8
autoinjector group
8
design unintentional
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!