This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Alan Jay Schwartz, MD; David R. Jobes, MD; Norig Ellison, MD
University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine Philadelphia

JAMA. 1981;246(7):735.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

In the recent report reevaluating the utility and safety of intracardiac injections (ICIs) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), Davison et al (1980;244:1110) concluded that ICI carries a low risk and is a desirable alternative (or even primary?) drug administration route. Harrison (1981;245:1315) concurs with and congratulates Davison and colleagues. We have a major concern with these conclusions.

The study by Davison et al may have selected those victims receiving ICI who had serious, life-threatening complications¹ from this procedure. The 55% CPR survival rate indicates that their study population was somewhat different from the usual, random adult population with only a 20% to 25% CPR survival rate. How many of the nonsurvivors, excluded from the study owing to a lack of autopsy results, were victims of more serious ICI complications?

While Davison et al may be theoretically correct about the clinical utility of ICI for drug administration, we . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?