In our comparison of two field trials of prehospital provider use of the F.A.S.T.1 and EZ-IO systems, more successful insertions with the EZ-IO were achieved than with the F.A.S.T.1 device. Limitations of our comparison include nonrandomization, the sequential field trial design, the potential for a learning effect, and self-reporting of data points by providers. A prospective, randomized evaluation of these devices is warranted to draw definitive conclusions about provider insertion success rate with these devices.

No abstract

This RSI training model can serve as a template for other agencies seeking to implement RSI. Limitations of this model include the availability of live animal labs and the expense of conducting the training. Intense medical director involvement has been key to the success of this prehospital RSI program.