首页> 外文期刊>Pain and therapy. >Comparative Human Factors Evaluation of Two Nasal Naloxone Administration Devices: NARCAN ? Nasal Spray and Naloxone Prefilled Syringe with Nasal Atomizer
【24h】

Comparative Human Factors Evaluation of Two Nasal Naloxone Administration Devices: NARCAN ? Nasal Spray and Naloxone Prefilled Syringe with Nasal Atomizer

机译:两种纳洛酮鼻腔给药装置的人为因素比较评估:NARCAN?鼻喷雾器和纳洛酮预充式注射器与鼻雾化器

获取原文

摘要

IntroductionOpioid overdose rescue situations are time-critical, high-stress scenarios that frequently require nonmedical first responders or bystanders to intervene and administer naloxone to avoid opioid-induced fatalities. Training nonmedical personnel to respond during such mentally constraining situations presents the human factors challenge of how best to design a safe and effective lay delivery system. This paper comparatively evaluates the ease of use of two nasal naloxone administration products: NARCANsup ? /sup Nasal Spray and a naloxone prefilled syringe with nasal atomizer (PFS-NA). MethodsWe evaluated the use requirements and usability of NARCANsup ? /sup Nasal Spray versus a naloxone PFS-NA using a systems-oriented method. First, we determined the use requirements of different user groups. Next, we focused on constructing a human factors task analysis of both products. Finally, we conducted a comparative risk assessment of the tasks that were different between the two products. ResultsInexperienced users, such as nonmedical first responders and bystanders, are at the highest risk of incorrectly administering naloxone, particularly in high-stress emergency opioid overdose situations. The device Preparation and Medication Delivery tasks most differentiate the use of NARCANsup ? /sup Nasal Spray and a PFS-NA. The level of task complexity and number of steps within those tasks is substantially greater for a PFS-NA than for the NARCANsup ? /sup Nasal Spray. ConclusionsNARCANsup ? /sup Nasal Spray requires fewer steps and is easier to administer than a naloxone PFS-NA. Thus, using NARCANsup ? /sup Nasal Spray should increase the likelihood that nonmedical personnel correctly deliver naloxone in time-critical, high-stress opioid overdose rescue situations. FundingADAPT Pharma, Inc.
机译:简介阿片类药物过量的抢救情况是时间紧迫,高压力的情况,经常需要非医学急救人员或旁观者干预和给药纳洛酮,以避免阿片类药物引起的死亡。对非医务人员进行培训,使其在这种精神受限的情况下做出响应,这是人为因素带来的挑战,即如何最好地设计安全有效的生皮输送系统。本文比较评估了两种鼻用纳洛酮给药产品的易用性:NARCAN ? 鼻喷雾器和纳洛酮预充式注射器,带有鼻雾化器(PFS-NA)。方法我们评估了NARCAN 的使用要求和可用性。 使用面向系统的方法,将鼻喷雾剂与纳洛酮PFS-NA比较。首先,我们确定了不同用户组的使用要求。接下来,我们专注于构建两种产品的人为因素任务分析。最后,我们对两种产品之间不同的任务进行了比较风险评估。结果经验不足的使用者(例如非医疗急救人员和旁观者)面临纳洛酮使用不当的最高风险,尤其是在高压力紧急阿片类药物过量的情况下。设备准备和药物输送任务最能区分NARCAN 的使用。 鼻喷雾剂和PFS-NA。对于PFS-NA,任务复杂度和这些任务中的步骤数量要比NARCAN ?更大。 鼻喷雾剂。结论NARCAN ? 与纳洛酮PFS-NA相比,鼻喷雾剂所需的步骤更少,并且更易于管理。因此,使用NARCAN 吗? 鼻喷雾剂应增加非医疗人员在时间紧迫,高压力的阿片类药物过量抢救情况下正确提供纳洛酮的可能性。资金ADAPT Pharma,Inc.

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号