252 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25075979)
1. Comparison of two intraosseous devices in adult patients in the emergency setting: a pilot study.
Demir OF; Aydin K; Akay H; Erbil B; Karcioglu O; Gulalp B
Eur J Emerg Med; 2016 Apr; 23(2):137-42. PubMed ID: 25075979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of two intraosseous access devices in adult patients under resuscitation in the emergency department: A prospective, randomized study.
Leidel BA; Kirchhoff C; Braunstein V; Bogner V; Biberthaler P; Kanz KG
Resuscitation; 2010 Aug; 81(8):994-9. PubMed ID: 20434823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of two mechanical intraosseous infusion devices: a pilot, randomized crossover trial.
Shavit I; Hoffmann Y; Galbraith R; Waisman Y
Resuscitation; 2009 Sep; 80(9):1029-33. PubMed ID: 19586701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Intraosseous access EZ-IO in a prehospital emergency service.
Torres F; Galán MD; Alonso Mdel M; Suárez R; Camacho C; Almagro V
J Emerg Nurs; 2013 Sep; 39(5):511-4. PubMed ID: 23099011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of four different intraosseous access devices during simulated pediatric resuscitation. A randomized crossover manikin trial.
Bielski K; Szarpak L; Smereka J; Ladny JR; Leung S; Ruetzler K
Eur J Pediatr; 2017 Jul; 176(7):865-871. PubMed ID: 28500463
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of two different intraosseous access methods in a physician-staffed helicopter emergency medical service - a quality assurance study.
Sørgjerd R; Sunde GA; Heltne JK
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med; 2019 Feb; 27(1):15. PubMed ID: 30760297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of the Fluid Resuscitation Rate with and without External Pressure Using Two Intraosseous Infusion Systems for Adult Emergencies, the CITRIN (Comparison of InTRaosseous infusion systems in emergency medicINe)-Study.
Hammer N; Möbius R; Gries A; Hossfeld B; Bechmann I; Bernhard M
PLoS One; 2015; 10(12):e0143726. PubMed ID: 26630579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of two intraosseous infusion systems for adult emergency medical use.
Brenner T; Bernhard M; Helm M; Doll S; Völkl A; Ganion N; Friedmann C; Sikinger M; Knapp J; Martin E; Gries A
Resuscitation; 2008 Sep; 78(3):314-9. PubMed ID: 18573590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. EZ-IO(®) intraosseous device implementation in a pre-hospital emergency service: A prospective study and review of the literature.
Santos D; Carron PN; Yersin B; Pasquier M
Resuscitation; 2013 Apr; 84(4):440-5. PubMed ID: 23160104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Consecutive field trials using two different intraosseous devices.
Frascone RJ; Jensen JP; Kaye K; Salzman JG
Prehosp Emerg Care; 2007; 11(2):164-71. PubMed ID: 17454802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Intraosseous devices: a randomized controlled trial comparing three intraosseous devices.
Hartholt KA; van Lieshout EM; Thies WC; Patka P; Schipper IB
Prehosp Emerg Care; 2010; 14(1):6-13. PubMed ID: 19947861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Military Medic Performance with Employment of a Commercial Intraosseous Infusion Device: A Randomized, Crossover Study.
Gendron B; Cronin A; Monti J; Brigg A
Mil Med; 2018 May; 183(5-6):e216-e222. PubMed ID: 29420766
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of Two Intraosseous Devices: The NIO Versus the EZ-IO by Novice Users-A Randomized Cross Over Trial.
Shina A; Baruch EN; Shlaifer A; Shovali A; Levi M; Yosefy O; Segal D; Bader T; Shavit I; Yitzhak A
Prehosp Emerg Care; 2017; 21(3):315-321. PubMed ID: 27870553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Intraosseous access in the prehospital setting: literature review.
Olaussen A; Williams B
Prehosp Disaster Med; 2012 Oct; 27(5):468-72. PubMed ID: 22877834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of intravenous and intraosseous access by pre-hospital medical emergency personnel with and without CBRN protective equipment.
Lamhaut L; Dagron C; Apriotesei R; Gouvernaire J; Elie C; Marx JS; Télion C; Vivien B; Carli P
Resuscitation; 2010 Jan; 81(1):65-8. PubMed ID: 19854554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Semiautomatic intraosseous devices in pediatric prehospital care.
Myers LA; Russi CS; Arteaga GM
Prehosp Emerg Care; 2011; 15(4):473-6. PubMed ID: 21815731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. EZ-IO(®) intraosseous device implementation in German Helicopter Emergency Medical Service.
Helm M; Haunstein B; Schlechtriemen T; Ruppert M; Lampl L; Gäßler M
Resuscitation; 2015 Mar; 88():43-7. PubMed ID: 25553609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Emergency intraosseous access in a helicopter emergency medical service: a retrospective study.
Sunde GA; Heradstveit BE; Vikenes BH; Heltne JK
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med; 2010 Oct; 18():52. PubMed ID: 20929544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Intraosseous vascular access is safe, effective and costs less than central venous catheters for patients in the hospital setting.
Dolister M; Miller S; Borron S; Truemper E; Shah M; Lanford MR; Philbeck TE
J Vasc Access; 2013; 14(3):216-24. PubMed ID: 23283646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of success rate and access time for an adult sternal intraosseous device deployed in the prehospital setting.
Byars DV; Tsuchitani SN; Erwin E; Anglemyer B; Eastman J
Prehosp Disaster Med; 2011 Apr; 26(2):127-9. PubMed ID: 21888733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
