References

Bewick VJ. Intraosseous cannulation in children. Anaesth Inten Care Med.. 2017; 18:(11)551-554 https://doi.org/https//.org/10.1016/j.mpaic.2017.07.002

2015. Understanding and establishing intraosseous access. 2015. https://tinyurl.com/ya29m3ba (accessed 25 April 2018)

Cullen PM. Intraosseous cannulation in children. Anaesth Intensive Care Med.. 2014; 15:(12)567-569 https://doi.org/https//.org/10.1016/j.mpaic.2014.09.006

Hallas P, Brabrand M, Folkestad L. Reasons for not using intraosseous access in critical illness. Emerg Med J.. 2012; 29:(6)506-507 https://doi.org/https//.org/10.1136/emj.2010.094011

2017 The Science and Fundamentals of Intraosseous Vascular Access. 2017. https://tinyurl.com/y8rxrqxb (accessed 25 April 2018)

Neuhaus D, Weiss M, Engelhardt T 2010. Semi-elective intraosseous infusion after failed intravenous access in pediatric anesthesia. Paediatr. Anaesth.. 2010; 20:(2)168-171 https://doi.org/https//.org/10.1111/j.1460-9592.2009.03244.x

Paxton JH. Intraosseous vascular access: A review. Trauma. 2012; 14:(3)195-232 https://doi.org/https//.org/10.1177/1460408611430175

Petitpas F, Guenezan J, Vendeuvre T, Scepi M, Oriot D, Mimoz O. Use of intra-osseous access in adults: a systematic review. Crit Care. 2016; 20 https://doi.org/https//.org/10.1186/s13054-016-1277-6

Phillips L, Brown L, Campbell T, Miller J, Proehl J, Youngberg B. Recommendations for the use of intraosseous vascular access for emergent and nonemergent situations in various health care settings: a consensus paper. Crit Care Nurse. 2010; 30:(6)e1-7 https://doi.org/https//.org/10.4037/ccn2010632

Samuels M, Wieteska S. Advanced Paediatric Life Support: A Practical Approach to Emergencies [online]. John Wiley and Sons. 2016;

Soar J, Nolan JP, Böttiger BW European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2015. Section 3. Adult advanced life support. Resuscitation. 2015; 95:100-147 https://doi.org/https//.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.07.016

Tobias JD, Ross A. Intraosseous infusions: A review for the anesthesiologist with a focus on pediatric use. Anesth Analg.. 2010; 110:(2)391-401 https://doi.org/https//.org/10.1213/ANE.0b013e3181c03c7f

Intraosseous access: a safe alternative route

02 May 2018
Volume 10 · Issue 5

Abstract

In each issue, the paramedic education team at Edge Hill University focuses on the clinical skills carried out by paramedics on the frontline, highlighting the importance of these skills and how to perform them. In this issue, Kacper Sumera, discusses the benefits of intraosseous access as a safe alternative to intravascular access.

Pre-hospital clinicians often have to deliver care to patients who are suffering from respiratory failure or impaired circulation.

In these circumstances, peripheral intravenous (IV) cannulation can prove difficult or even impossible (Petitpas et al, 2016). Intraosseous (IO) access offers a safe and quick alternative to the intravascular access route (Neuhaus et al, 2010). However, there are limitations and complications that need to be considered.

Intraosseous infusion

IO infusion is a method of administration of medications or fluids directly into the marrow of a bone (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Fluid is administered into the bone marrow cavity

In contrast to other routes, it provides a ‘non-collapsible’ entry point to the central venous system (Tobias and Kinder Ross, 2010).

Anatomy and physiology

The bones that can be used for IO cannulation are those possessing significant amounts of ‘red’ and ‘yellow’ marrow. These can be found in every type of bone in varying amounts. Red marrow, or haematopoietic tissue, is transformed over time into the yellow marrow—this process begins at approximately 5 years of age (Paxton, 2012). Even though yellow marrow is less vascular, it still provides good absorption of medication and fluids, enabling clinicians to use this access route for patients of all ages (Bewick, 2017).

Site choice depends on local protocols and the equipment available. The two most common sites are the head of the humerus and proximal tibia (Soar et al, 2015) (Figure 2; Figure 3). Once a site is selected and fluid administered into the bone marrow cavity, it is drained through the intramedullary and emissary vessels into the central venous circulation (Figure 1) (Cullen, 2014).

Figure 2. The humeral head site
Figure 3. The proximal tibia site

Indications

Using the IO route depends on local protocols and the clinician's scope of practice must be adhered to. In life-threatening emergencies, the IO route is recommended where IV access is deemed unattainable within a short space of time (Soar et al, 2015; Samuels and Wieteska, 2016). IO cannulation should be considered initially in patients who have been intravenously cannulated many times, or who are recreational drug abusers (Bewick, 2017). An IO catheter should be removed within 24 hours of insertion (Montez, 2017).

Contraindications

IO access is contraindicated in the following circumstances (Phillips et al, 2010; Paxton, 2012; Petitpas et al, 2016):

  • The clinician is not able to locate the landmarks because of abnormal anatomy, gross obesity or inadequate training
  • IO access was unsuccessfully attempted in the same bone within 48 hours
  • Evidence of infection at the site
  • Unhealed fracture or surgery in the same limb as the targeted bone
  • Compromised perfusion of the limb
  • Bone disease such as osteogenesis imperfecta, osteopenia or osteopetrosis
  • Prosthetic bone or joint in the targeted bone.
  • Other considerations

    IO infusion can be a complex procedure, therefore there are other aspects of patient care that must also be taken into consideration.

    Pain

    In most cases, patients requiring IO access are unconscious. However, pain needs to be considered in some circumstances if the patient is alert. Research suggests that patients who are conscious report a mild pain experience, 2.5–3.5 out of 10, when inserting the IO catheter which is comparable to pain experienced in peripheral IV catheter insertion (Phillips et al, 2010). The surveyed patients reported the humeral site to be the least painful (Paxton, 2012). Pain was reportedly more significant during the infusion and dependent on the pace of administration (Bradburn and Gill, 2015).

    Training

    A study by Hallas et al (2012) suggests that despite clinicians being familiar with IO access, they are reluctant to use it. Of the 759 clinicians surveyed, 23.5% were dealing with a patient whom they believed would benefit from IO cannulation but this had not been performed. Reasons given included the shortage of required equipment (48.3%), and lack of confidence or inadequate training (32.6%) (Hallas et al, 2012).

    Complications

    IO cannulation rarely results in complications, with literature suggesting that complication occurrence is less than 1% (Bewick, 2017). Most complications are a consequence of poor insertion technique or improper use (Cullen, 2014; Petitpas et al, 2016; Bewick, 2017). Complications include:

  • Dislodgement of the cannula (most common, 10%)
  • Infections
  • Extravasation (leakage from blood vessels into the surrounding tissue)
  • Compartment syndrome
  • Damaged equipment
  • Fat embolism.
  • Performing the procedure

    There is not one clear guidance on how to insert the IO cannula. This is a result of variation in patient age groups and anatomy (Tobias and Kinder Ross, 2010). The clinician performing the procedure should adhere to universal infection control precautions. If the setting allows it, the clinician's hands should be washed; the site cleaned using the Aseptic Non-Touch Technique (ANTT®); appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) worn; and a sharps bin made ready.

    Site and needle selection

    There are many potential insertion sites for IO access. As mentioned, the most common in pre-hospital care are the humeral head and proximal tibia. It is important for the clinician to become familiar with local protocols, procedures and available equipment—some devices are designed for use on particular anatomical sites (Paxton, 2012; Petitpas et al, 2016).

    Humeral head

    See Figure 2 and the following instructions:

  • Following the selection of the upper limb, flex the patient's elbow 90° and place the patient's hand over the umbilicus
  • Palpate for the surgical neck of the humerus and locate the greater tuberosity
  • The insertion site is located 1 cm above the surgical neck and 2–3 cm lateral to the bicep tendon
  • Once the catheter is in situ, the patient's arm must not be abducted as this can result in bending of the needle.
  • Proximal tibia

    See Figure 3 and the following instructions:

  • Select the limb and stabilise the leg with a firm support behind the knee
  • Locate the patella, move distally with your finger by approximately 1–2 cm depending on the patient's anatomy
  • Feel the tibial tuberosity; the insertion site is just 1 cm medial to your finger
  • In infants, the site is 0.5–1 cm and in children 1–3 cm below and just medial to the tibial tuberosity (Cullen, 2014).
  • Other techniques

    See Figure 4; Figure 5; and Figure 6 and their corresponding instructions in Table 1 for the Cook intraosseous needle insertion technique (Paxton, 2012; Petitpas et al, 2016; Bewick, 2016).

    Figure 4. Select the correct size
    Figure 5. Stabilise the needle
    Figure 6. Begin inserting the needle

    Select the insertion site
    Select the correct size of needle (Figure 4)
    Clean the site
    Consider an anaesthetic (as per local policy/guidelines)
    Place the handle on the palm of your dominant hand and stabilise the needle by holding it approximately 5 mm below the tip of the needle with your thumb and the index finger (Figure 5)
    While stabilising the limb, begin insertion of the needle by applying firm downward pressure into the bone. The needle should point slightly away from the joint, directed distally in line with the axis of the selected bone (Figure 6)
    Continue advancing the needle by applying downward pressure with the steady clockwise rotation of the wrist until a slight give, or ‘pop’, is felt
    Remove the stylet by holding the catheter and turning the handle anti-clockwise; dispose of the sharp
    Check gently if the catheter is firmly inserted into the tuberosity of the bone (the needle should feel like a nail in a board)
    Attach the tubing with a 3-way cap to the catheter and aspirate the bone marrow (confirming intramedullary needle position)
    Flush the catheter with 5–10 ml of 0.9% sodium chloride
    Stabilise the catheter
    If required, remove the IO needle by traction upwards with gentle rotation from side to side; dress the insertion side as any other minor laceration
    Source: Tobias and Kinder Ross, 2010; Paxton, 2012; Cullen, 2014; Bradburn et al, 2015

    General advice

  • Depending on the patient's level of consciousness, introduce yourself, explain what the procedure entails, and obtain informed consent (Petitpas et al, 2016)
  • Choose the site and stabilise the limb in the correct position. This may require the assistance of a colleague or a third party (Bradburn and Gill, 2015)
  • Clean the site using appropriate antiseptic technique. Consider an anaesthetic as per local protocols
  • Following the needle reaching the bone marrow, remove the stylet
  • Aspirate blood marrow and then flush the catheter with 10 ml of 0.9% sodium chloride (Tobias and Kinder Ross, 2010)
  • Secure the catheter with a dressing
  • After each drug administration, the catheter should be flushed with a minimum of 10 ml of 0.9% sodium chloride (Tobias and Kinder Ross, 2010)
  • The clinician should assess the patient's anatomy and the depth of the tissue over the insertion site by palpation with the thumb or a finger
  • Attaching tubing to the IO catheter reduces the unintended manipulation of the needle in comparison to a syringe on its own
  • Every IO cannulation should be correctly recorded on the patient report form by including: the time of cannulation; the site of insertion; the clinician performing the cannulation should be identifiable; and any unsuccessful attempts should be recorded.
  • Learning Points

  • The intrasseous (IO) route offers safe and quick alternative access to the intraveneous (IV) route
  • The IO route is recommended where the lead on-scene clinician deems IV access not readily attainable
  • The two most commonly-used sites are the humeral head and proximal tibia, with the humeral head reportedly the least painful site for IO cannulation
  • IO access is contraindicated if there was an unsuccessful attempt in the targeted bone within 48 hours