Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Injections, Jet”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources
PubMed1999

Painless intravenous catheterization by intradermal jet injection of lidocaine: a randomized trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy and cost of lidocaine cutaneous anesthesia by two jet injectors to routine needle infiltration for pain relief of intravenous (i.v.) catheterization, hypothesizing that jet injection of lidocaine is less painful than its needle infiltration. DESIGN: Randomized, prospective, controlled trial. SETTING: University hospital outpatient surgical unit. PARTICIPANTS: 75 surgical patients ASA I and II. INTERVENTIONS: Three groups of 25 patients each were given intradermal lidocaine anesthesia via conventional 25-gauge needle/syringe; by MedEJet or Biojector jet injector prior to IV catheterization with an 18-gauge Jelco catheter. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Visual analogue pain scores (VAS) (0 = no pain, 10 = intolerable pain) and subjective pain intensity scores (PIS) (0 = not painful, 4 = intolerable pain) at lidocaine application and at i.v. catheterization, were recorded. Cost assessment of each method was made. At local anesthetic application, no pain by proportion of VAS = 0 with MedEJet: 25/25 (confidence interval [CI]: 0.868, 0.999) and Biojector: 24/25 (CI 0.804, 0.991) was noted, but-22 of 25 patients experienced pain with needle administration: (with VAS = 0; 3/25 [CI: 0.044, 0.302]) (posterior probability [PP] > 0.999). The corresponding VAS scores (means +/- SD) were 0.00 +/- 0.00, 0.04 +/- 0.20, and 2.4 +/- 2.23 (p < 0.001). No pain by proportion of PIS = 0 with MedEJet: 25/25 (CI: 0.868, 0.999 and Biojector: 23/25 (0.749, 0.976) was noted, but pain in 20/25 was felt with the needle: 5/25 (CI: 0.090, 0.394) (PP > 0.999). The corresponding PIS scores were 0.00 +/- 0.00, 0.16 +/- 0.55, and 1.24 +/- 1.00 (p < 0.001). At i.v. catheterization, no pain by proportion of VAS = 0 with MedEJet: 22/25 (CI: 0.698, 0.956) or Biojector: 21/25 (CI: 0.651, 0.934) was noted; but pain in 19/25 with needle administration was experienced: 6/25 (CI: 0.116, 0.436) (PP > 0.999). The corresponding scores were 0.12 +/- 0.33, 0.44 +/- 0.20, and 1.64 +/- 1.50 (p < 0.001). No pain by proportion of PIS = 0 with MedEJet: 24/25 (CI: 0.804, 0.991) or Biojector: 24/25 (CI: 0.804, 0.991) was noted, but pain was apparent in 12/25 with needle administration: 13/25 (CI: 0.334, 0.701) (PP > 0.999). The corresponding scores were 0.00 +/- 0.00, 0.00 +/- 0.00, and 0.76 +/- 0.88 (p < 0.001). Cost per application: MedEJet = $0.13; needle/syringe = $0.50; Biojector = $0.94. CONCLUSIONS: Almost completely painless i.v. catheterization was carried out by jet injection of lidocaine, but needle infiltration produced discomfort or pain and did not significantly reduce discomfort or pain at the i.v. needle insertion.

Administration, Cutaneous↗
PubMed1993

Jet-injected insulin is associated with decreased antibody production and postprandial glucose variability when compared with needle-injected insulin in gestational diabetic women.

OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the glycemic response and antibody formation in gestational diabetic women treated with insulin injected by a needle or a jet. The American Diabetes Association's position statement on jet injectors raised the concern that "insulin could be denatured as a result of forceful injection through a tiny port, which could lead to an increase in antibody formation" (Diabetes Care 11:600, 1988). However, the pharmacokinetics of jet-injected insulin suggest that it might be useful in controlling postprandial glucose levels. METHODS: We randomized 20 women with gestational diabetes mellitus (< 34 wk gestation) who required insulin to receive either jet-injected or needle-injected human NPH and regular insulin. Variables of interest were evaluated at the start of therapy, weekly until delivery, and 6-wk postpartum that included: 1) insulin antibodies in the mother and her infant, 2) HbA1c, 3) insulin dose, 4) fasting and postprandial glucose levels, and 5) subject acceptance and preference. RESULTS: Of the 10 women in the needle group, 6 developed significant insulin antibodies compared with 1 of 10 in the jet group (P < 0.001). HbA1c and insulin doses were the same in both groups. During the test meal, glucose levels in the jet group were significantly lower (P < 0.01), yet none of the women in the jet group experienced blood glucose < 70 mg/dl (3.89 mM) at 3-4 h after the meal, compared with 5 in the needle group (P < 0.001). Jet injection was associated with less variability (P < 0.001) in postprandial glucose values but slightly greater variability (P < 0.05) in fasting glucose. Jet-injected insulin was more readily accepted by subjects than needle injections. CONCLUSIONS: Jet injection is associated with a diminished antibody response and postprandial variability compared with needle-injected insulin. Thus, this warrants consideration as a therapeutic option for women with gestational diabetes mellitus and may also be applicable to nonpregnant, insulin-requiring diabetic patients.

Adult↗
PubMed1974

Reactions and serologic responses to monovalent acetone-inactivated typhoid vaccine and heat-killed TAB when given by jet injection.

Monovalent acetone-inactivated typhoid vaccine and heat-killed TAB caused local reactions in 82-88% of volunteers vaccinated by jet injection, whereas they caused local reactions in only 24% of volunteers injected by means of a conventional syringe. Both vaccines induced a high seroconversion rate to typhoid H antigen, but neither proved significantly immunogenic to antigens O and Vi. There was no increase in the occurrence of local reactions when a second jet injection was given 5 weeks after the first.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Jet injection of insulin during self-monitoring of blood glucose.

Insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus has been treated with four jet injections of insulin (regular insulin before each meal and intermediate insulin at bedtime) during self-monitoring of blood glucose levels. The blood glucose levels generally remain within 60 and 150 mg/dl.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

A new route, jet injection for anesthetic induction in children. IV. Midazolam plasma levels.

The jet injector route for midazolam was used in 40 children 1 - 6 years of age undergoing various short duration surgical procedures. A randomly selected dose of 100, 150, and 200 microg/kg was given by a jet injector and compared to 80 microg/kg by conventional i.m. injection with syringe and needle to induce sedation/anesthesia. Because of clinical limitations, plasma midazolam levels were measured for only up to 32 min post-injection. Peak levels were 70.4, 105.8, 157.3, and 135.5 ng/ml in the corresponding groups. Plasma levels reached their peak faster after 200 microg/kg jet injection than after 80microg/kg i.m. midazolam. Furthermore, midazolam plasma levels were sustained longer after 200 microg/kg by jet injection. Larger doses of midazolam are required by jet injection than by i.m. injection. Individual subjects showed considerable variability in plasma levels of midazolam by both methods of administration, although jet injection was more convenient and less traumatic.

Adjuvants, Anesthesia↗
PubMed1995

A new route, jet-injection for anesthetic induction in children: I. Midazolam dose-range finding studies.

In order to assure rapid anesthetic induction in children and to prevent the psychological and physical trauma associated with restraint during mask induction or intramuscular injection, we evaluated the utility of a jet-injector and the effectiveness of midazolam for anesthetic co-induction in a dose-range finding study. Forty children (age: 1-6 yrs), whose parents gave a valid consent approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) and who underwent minor surgery, were randomized into four equal groups: A. midazolam 100 micrograms/kg by jet-injection (JI); B. midazolam 150 micrograms/kg JI; C. midazolam 200 micrograms/kg JI; D. midazolam 80 micrograms/kg i.m by conventional syringe-needle. As a drying agent, atropine 20 micrograms/kg JI or i.m. was also added to the midazolam solution. The onset and full sedative effect of midazolam, the scoring of sedation and emotional state, the ease of placement of the intravenous catheter, the speed of recovery by Aldrete-scores and the time for safe discharge were evaluated. No demographic differences were observed among the four groups with similar mean duration of surgery and anesthesia. The mean sedation score was reduced in Group C the most, less in the B, A and D groups. The onset of sedation ranged from 3-5 min in groups A, B or C as compared to 5-9 min in D. Ideal conditions for the start of i.v. catheter were best achieved in group C (8:8) and B (8:10) in contrast to groups A (2:10) and D (0:10). Whereas no i.v. start was difficult in B and C, 6:10 were difficult in D and A. None of the children in the three JI groups (A, B and C) experienced unpleasant recall or pain from the injection during the whole procedure. Response to verbal stimuli recovered in 3 min after the end of anesthesia and the children were discharged 8-9 minutes afterward. None of the children needed a longer than 15-minute interval to reach an Aldrete score of 10. No differences among the groups were observed as to the time of recovery or discharge. This new route of midazolam administration with the jet-injector allows pain-free and stress-free induction of anaesthesia after rapid placement of an intravenous catheter and prevents the transmission of infections.

Anesthesia, General↗
PubMed1996

Effectiveness of a jet injection system in administering morphine and heparin to healthy adults.

BACKGROUND: Jet injection eliminates the risk of contaminated needlestick injuries when giving intramuscular or subcutaneous medications. Clinical efficacy of the Biojector System was equivalent to that of needle and syringe injection in unpublished trials with vaccines, but had not been studied using other drugs. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of the Biojector with conventional needle and syringe injection in administering intramuscular morphine and subcutaneous heparin to healthy adults, as measured by plasma drug concentration. METHODS: Intramuscular injections of morphine 8 mg (5 mg if weight < or = 65 kg) were given 24 hours apart with the jet injector and with a needle and syringe to 30 subjects at the deltoid site and 10 subjects at the dorsogluteal site. Blood samples for plasma concentrations of free morphine were drawn at 15, 30, 45, 60, 120, and 240 minutes and were analyzed using radioimmunoassay. Abdominal subcutaneous injections of heparin 3500 U were given every 8 hours for 5 days with both injection methods to 29 subjects, with 48 hours between the two series. Daily blood samples for plasma heparin were analyzed by colorimetric assay for antifactor Xa activity. RESULTS: Mean free morphine concentration, peak value, and area under the curve did not differ significantly between the deltoid and dorsogluteal sites or between the jet injector and needle and syringe. Values of mean daily heparin concentrations and area under the curve were low and did not differ between the two injection methods. CONCLUSION: Plasma drug concentrations provided by the Biojector were equivalent to those provided by conventional needle and syringe when administering intramuscular morphine and low-dose subcutaneous heparin.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

V. A new route, jet injection of lidocaine for skin wheal for painless intravenous catheterization.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of intradermal lidocaine anesthesia by two jet injectors to the routine needle infiltration and to the topical EMLA cream. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In a randomized, prospective, controlled trial, 100 consenting surgicenter patients in a university hospital setting were divided into four groups (n = 25, each); intradermal lidocaine anesthesia was given either by the conventional 25 g needle/syringe or the Med-E-Jet or Biojector injector or EMLA cream was applied on the skin. Visual analogue pain scores (VAS) or verbal pain intensity scores (PIS) were reported by the patients at lidocaine application and i.v. catheterization. Cost was also assessed. RESULTS: At lidocaine application, no pain was reported, since proportions of VAS = 0 were 25/25 (CI: 0.868, 0.999) with Med-E-Jet; 24/25 (0.804, 0.991) with Biojector; 25/25 (0.868, 0.999) with EMLA; in contrast to pain, 3/25 (0.044, 0.302) with the needle (PP > 0.999). The VAS scores (mean +/- SD) were 0.00 +/- 0.00, 0.04 +/- 0.20, 0.00 +/- 0.00, and 2.4 +/- 2.2 respectively (p < 0.00 1). No pain was reported by proportions of PIS = 0 with Med-E-Jet: 25/25 (CI: 0.868, 0.999); with Biojector: 23/25 (0.749, 0.976); EMLA 25/25 (0,868, 0.999); but pain with the needle: 5/25 (0.090, 0.394) (PP > 0.999). The mean +/- SD PIS scores were 0.00 +/- 0.00, 0.16 +/- 0.55, 0.00 +/- 0.00, and 1.24 +/- 1.00, respectively (p < 0.001). At i.v. catheterization, the proportions of VAS = 0 scores were 22/25 with Med-E-Jet (0.698, 0.956); 21/25 (0.651, 0.934) with Biojector; but some pain with needle: 6/25 (0.116, 0.436) (PP > 0.999). The mean +/- SD VAS scores were: 0.12 +/- 0.33, 0.44 +/- 0.20, and 1.64 +/- 1.50, respectively (p < 0.001). No pain was reported by PIS = 0 scores in 24/25 (0.804, 0.991) with Med-E-Jet; 24/25 (0.804, 0.991) with the Biojector; but pain by zero PIS scores 13/25 (0.334, 0.703) in half of the patients in the needle group (PP > 0.999). The mean +/- SD scores were 0.00 +/- 0.00, 0.00 +/- 0.00, and 0.76 +/- 0.88, respectively (p < 0.001). The EMLA cream was not evaluated because of inadequate duration of application prior to anesthetic induction. Cost/application were: Med-E-Jet = $ 0.13; needle = $ 0.50; Biojector = $ 0.94 and EMLA = $ 3.76. CONCLUSION: Almost completely painless i.v. catheterization by jet injection of lidocaine was accomplished, while needle infiltration produced pain/discomfort and did not significantly reduce it at the i.v. needle insertion.

Administration, Cutaneous↗
PubMed1983

Jet injection--local anesthesia for fitting and removal of IUDs.

Women with small uterine cavities and narrow cervical canals in particular suffer from symptoms such as discomfort, pain, cramps, bradycardia, syncope, and epileptoid convulsions during IUD insertions. These problems can be avoided by paracervical block (PCB) with syringe and needle, which may, in rare cases, entail hazardous side effects. These can be eliminated by the use of Jet Injection PCB. The Jet Injector deposits a 2% or 3% anesthetic solution paracervically submucously under high carbon dioxide pressure. The patient's fear of injection with a needle is avoided. The method can be applied by paramedics since intravascular application of anesthetic solution is impossible. The use of a more concentrated anesthetic solution allows dose reduction and the method of dispersion of the micro-drops ensures a more rapid onset. Premedication is not required and disposable material is economized on. This study is based on the application of Jet Injection PCB before insertion of medicated IUDs in 447 women; 60% nulligravidae, 14% nulliparous with abortion(s), 13% primiparae, and 13% multiparous. Age ranged from 15-47 years.

Age Distribution↗
PubMed1994

[Anesthesia with jet injection. Use of Medi-Jector EZ dermojet for anesthesia in minor surgery].

The local anaesthetic procedure is often painful to the patient. During a period of 21 weeks, jet injection was used as the anaesthetic procedure in 55 cases of minor surgery in a single general practice. The application is discussed, giving a variety of examples. The method provides a simple and almost pain-free anaesthetic procedure in the majority of minor surgical operations. The amount of anaesthetic is reduced. The method is particularly suitable for anaesthetizing sensitive areas like the finger of a child or verrucas.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Jet injection of local anesthetic decreases pain of arterial cannulation in awake neurosurgical patients.

Arterial cannulation through the standard skin wheal of local anesthetic raised with a needle may be painful. The authors compared the efficacy of local anesthetic injected via a 25G needle versus a Bioject jet injector for arterial cannulation in awake neurosurgical patients. After institutional review board approval, 40 patients were randomized to receive 0.3 mL 1% lidocaine adjusted to pH 7.0 with NaHCO3 by Bioject with a 2-cm spacer between the syringe and skin or by 25G needle injection. Two pain assessments were used at the time of local anesthetic injection and at arterial cannulation. Patients rated their pain on a visual analog scale (VAS) (0 = no pain, 100 = worst pain). Observers scored patient response as 0 (no response), 1 (flinch), or 2 (withdrawal). The VAS at injection was 23 +/- 19 for the needle group and 3 +/- 6 for the Bioject group (P < 0.001). The VAS at arterial cannulation was 39 +/- 25 for the needle group and 15 +/- 22 for the Bioject group (P < 0.001). Median observer scores at injection and cannulation were 1 (range 0-2) for the needle group and 0 (range 0-2) for the Bioject group (P < 0.001). Patients in the Bioject group experienced significantly less pain during lidocaine administration and at the time of arterial cannulation by their own and by an observer's assessment than the needle injection group. Jet injection of local anesthetic should be considered prior to arterial cannulation in awake patients.

Aged↗
PubMed1984

Bilateral tension pneumothorax during pediatric bronchoscopy (high-frequency jet injection ventilation).

Bilateral tension pneumothorax complicating high-frequency jet injection ventilation during rigid open bronchoscopy for foreign body removal in a 3-year-old child is reported. Subcutaneous emphysema, bradycardia and low voltage of the QRS complex were the presenting symptoms. Disparition of heart dullness by percussion was the most suggestive clinical sign while auscultation of the breath sounds was not conclusive. It is stressed that tension pneumothorax is a potential life-threatening complication of high-frequency injection ventilation and should be promptly considered in any case of persistent cardiac deterioration during pediatric bronchoscopy.

Airway Obstruction↗
PubMed1991

Risks of jet injection of insulin in children.

The aim of our study was to assess whether a non-invasive insulin injector could improve the metabolic control of ten diabetic children complaining of painful injections with syringe and needle. The cumulative study period amounted to 1347 days. Whereas a non-significant rise in insulin needs was observed (from 0.98 +/- 0.03 to 1.03 +/- 0.06 units/kg per day, mean +/- sem), mean HbA1c value remained unchanged (8.9% +/- 0.4% vs 9.0% +/- 0.5%). Jet injections were felt as less painful than those using syringe and needle (nine out of ten cases). This advantage was hampered by side-effects in eight out of ten cases such as episodes of glycoketonuria (six out of ten cases) leading to hospitalization in three patients. Other side-effects included inability to adjust injection pressure (four out of ten cases) and technical failure requiring an exchange of injector in five cases. The four children with most serious problems were significantly younger (P = 0.009) than other subjects. In conclusion, this type of injector should be discouraged in young diabetic children. For older children and adolescents, it may be an alternative to syringe and needle provided repeated detailed information and tight medical supervision is available.

Adolescent↗