• D W Spaite, T D Valenzuela, E A Criss, H W Meislin, and P Hinsberg.
• Arizona Emergency Medicine Research Center, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson.
• Ann Emerg Med. 1994 Aug 1;24(2):209-14.

Study HypothesisEmergency medical services personnel are highly proficient at rapid i.v. line placement in the prehospital setting, with little difference between urban and nonurban areas in a geographically diverse state.DesignProspective evaluation by an in-field observer of timing, sequence, success rates, and patient characteristics for IV line placement by prehospital personnel for 1 year.SettingTwenty advanced life support agencies from all four emergency medical service regions of Arizona.ParticipantsFifty-eight patients encountered by participating emergency medical service agencies who had at least one i.v. line placement attempt in the prehospital setting.ResultsUrban agencies encountered 24 patients (41.4%), and nonurban agencies encountered 34 (58.6%). Fifty-seven of 58 patients (98.3%) had at least one successful i.v. line started before arrival at a hospital. All 24 urban patients and 33 of 34 nonurban patients (97.1%) had a successful i.v. line attempt (P = .586, power = .09). In the urban setting, 24 of 31 attempts (77.4%) were successful, and in the nonurban setting 35 of 52 attempts (67.3%) were successful (P = .464, power = .28). Mean i.v. line procedure intervals were 1.6 minutes in urban and 1.4 minutes in nonurban settings (P = .408, power = .7). Thirty of 31 i.v. line attempts (96.7%) were completed in less than 4 minutes in urban systems, and 49 of 52 IV line attempts (94.2%) were completed in less than 4 minutes in nonurban systems (P = .520, power = .13). Mean i.v. line procedure intervals were 1.3 minutes for successful attempts and 2.1 minutes for unsuccessful ones (P = .015). Mean i.v. line procedure intervals for on-scene attempts were 1.3 minutes compared with 2.0 minutes for attempts during transport (P = .005). On average, i.v. line attempts in trauma patients took only 1.0 minutes compared with 1.7 in medical patients (P = .017).ConclusionPersonnel in the 20 advanced life support agencies studied were extremely adept (rate of 98.3%) at obtaining i.v. line access in the prehospital setting. The time required to complete i.v. line placement was very short, and little difference was noted between urban and nonurban providers. I.v. procedure intervals were shorter for successful attempts, on-scene attempts, and attempts in trauma patients compared with their counterparts.

22 keywords...

hide…