首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Asthma and Allergy >Are adrenaline autoinjectors fit for purpose? A pilot study of the mechanical and injection performance characteristics of a cartridge- versus a syringe-based autoinjector
【24h】

Are adrenaline autoinjectors fit for purpose? A pilot study of the mechanical and injection performance characteristics of a cartridge- versus a syringe-based autoinjector

机译:肾上腺素自动注射器适合吗?对基于筒的自动注射器与基于注射器的自动注射器的机械和注射性能特征进行的初步研究

获取原文
       

摘要

Background: Adrenaline autoinjectors (AAIs) are prescribed to facilitate the intramuscular administration of adrenaline in patients diagnosed with life-threatening anaphylaxis. This pilot study investigated the injection and functional properties of two AAIs (deploying different delivery systems) under standard conditions, after dynamic and mechanical stresses, and in the presence of denim.Methods: The differences between a cartridge-based AAI (EpiPen? Junior) and a syringe-based AAI (Anapen? Junior) were assessed using three sets of tests. Test 1: under standard conditions, the injection depth and dose were measured in ballistic gelatine (a validated tissue simulant). Test 2: before the safety cap removal and activation forces were measured, AAIs were subjected to either of two preconditioning tests: 1) free-fall drop test; or 2) static load (ie, 400 N, equivalent to 40 kg weight) test; or 3) no preconditioning. Test 3: under standard conditions, injection properties into ballistic gelatine in the presence and absence of denim were investigated. Statistical analyses were performed using the Student’s t-test or Welch’s test.Results: The maximum depth of delivery was significantly greater with cartridge AAI (n = 4, mean 21.09 ± 2.54 mm) than with syringe AAI (n = 5; mean 11.64 ± 0.80 mm; P = 0.003). After 2.5 seconds, cartridge AAI (n = 4) discharged significantly more dose than syringe AAI (n = 3; 74.3% versus 25.7% of total dose; P = 0.001). Both cartridge and syringe AAI withstood the free-fall drop test, but almost all devices failed to activate following the static load test. Under standard conditions, significantly less force was required to remove the safety cap of cartridge AAI than syringe AAI (both n = 15; mean 9.56 ± 2.36 N versus 20.23 ± 6.61 N, respectively; P < 0.001), but a significantly greater activation force was required for cartridge AAI than syringe AAI (mean 23.01 ± 3.96 N versus 8.06 ± 0.51 N, respectively; P < 0.001). The presence of denim did not alter the activation force or effective needle length of either of the AAIs.Conclusion: Cartridge AAI appears significantly more capable of consistently and rapidly delivering a clinically relevant dose of intramuscular adrenaline than syringe AAI. However, both devices showed shortcomings in their ability to sustain mechanical stress similar to that which is likely over their shelf life, and as such, may not be fit for life-saving purpose.
机译:背景:肾上腺素自动注射器(AAI)的处方是为了便利对诊断为威胁生命的过敏反应的患者进行肌内注射肾上腺素。这项初步研究调查了两种AAI(采用不同的递送系统)在动态和机械应力作用下以及存在牛仔布的情况下的注射性能和功能特性。方法:基于弹药的AAI(EpiPen?Junior)之间的差异使用三套测试评估了基于注射器的AAI(Anapen?Junior)。测试1:在标准条件下,在防弹明胶(经验证的组织模拟物)中测量注射深度和剂量。测试2:在测量安全帽的拆卸和启动力之前,对AAI进行了两种预处理测试之一:1)自由落体测试;或2)静载荷(即400 N,相当于40千克重量)测试;或或3)不进行预处理。测试3:在标准条件下,研究在存在和不存在牛仔布的情况下向防弹明胶的注射性质。使用学生t检验或Welch检验进行统计分析。结果:AAI针筒(n = 4,平均21.09±2.54 mm)的最大分娩深度明显大于AAI针筒(n = 5;平均11.64± 0.80毫米; P = 0.003)。 2.5秒后,药筒AAI(n = 4)排出的剂量明显大于注射器AAI(n = 3; 74.3%对总剂量的25.7%; P = 0.001)。弹药筒和注射器AAI都经受住了自由落体测试,但是在静态负载测试后,几乎所有设备均无法激活。在标准条件下,卸下墨盒AAI的安全盖所需的力要比注射器AAI小得多(均为n = 15;平均值分别为9.56±2.36 N和20.23±6.61 N; P <0.001),但激活力明显更大注射器AAI所需的剂量要比注射器AAI所需的分别为23.01±3.96 N和8.06±0.51 N; P <0.001。牛仔布的存在不会改变任何一种AAI的激活力或有效针长。结论:与注射器AAI相比,碳粉盒AAI似乎能够更稳定,更快速地递送与临床相关剂量的肌内肾上腺素。但是,这两种设备在承受机械应力方面均表现出不足之处,类似于在整个保质期内可能承受的应力,因此可能不适合挽救生命。

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