Pressures of Wilderness Improvised Wound Irrigation Techniques: How Do They Compare?

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：John B. Luck ; MD^a ; Danielle Campagne ; MD^a ; Roberto Falcó ; n Banchs ; BS^b ; Jason Montoya ; BS^c ; Susanne J. Spano ; MD^a ; ^{sspano@gmail.com}
• 刊名：Wilderness & Environmental Medicine
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：December 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：27
• 期：4
• 页码：476-481
• 全文大小：610 K
• 卷排序：27

文摘

Compare the pressures measured by improvised irrigation techniques to a commercial device and to prior reports.MethodsDevices tested included a commercial 500-mL compressible plastic bottle with splash guard, a 10-mL syringe, a 10-mL syringe with a 14-ga angiocatheter (with needle removed), a 50-mL Sawyer syringe, a plastic bag punctured with a 14-ga needle, a plastic bottle with cap punctured by a 14-ga needle, a plastic bottle with sports top, and a bladder-style hydration system. Each device was leveled on a support, manually compressed, and aimed toward a piece of glass. A high-speed camera placed behind the glass recorded the height of the stream upon impact at its highest and lowest point. Measurements were recorded 5 times for each device. Pressures in pounds per square inch (psi) were calculated.ResultsThe syringe and angiocatheter pressures measured the highest pressures (16–49 psi). The 50-mL syringe (7–11 psi), 14-ga punctured water bottle (7–25 psi), and water bottle with sports top (3–7 psi) all measured at or above the commercial device (4–5 psi). Only the bladder-style hydration system (1–2 psi) and plastic bag with 14-ga needle puncture (2–3 psi) did not reach pressures generated by the commercial device.ConclusionsPressures are consistent with those previously reported. All systems using compressible water bottles and all syringe-based systems provided pressures at or exceeding a commercial wound irrigation device. A 14-ga punctured plastic bag and bladder-style hydration pack failed to generate similar irrigation pressures.