About: Autoinjector is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 332 publications have been published within this topic receiving 4875 citations. The topic is also known as: auto-injector.
TL;DR: For subjects in status epilepticus, intramuscular midazolam is at least as safe and effective as intravenous lorazepam for prehospital seizure cessation.
Abstract: Background Early termination of prolonged seizures with intravenous administration of benzodiazepines improves outcomes. For faster and more reliable administration, paramedics increasingly use an intramuscular route. Methods This double-blind, randomized, noninferiority trial compared the efficacy of intramuscular midazolam with that of intravenous lorazepam for children and adults in status epilepticus treated by paramedics. Subjects whose convulsions had persisted for more than 5 minutes and who were still convulsing after paramedics arrived were given the study medication by either intramuscular autoinjector or intravenous infusion. The primary outcome was absence of seizures at the time of arrival in the emergency department without the need for rescue therapy. Secondary outcomes included endotracheal intubation, recurrent seizures, and timing of treatment relative to the cessation of convulsive seizures. This trial tested the hypothesis that intramuscular midazolam was noninferior to intravenous lor...
TL;DR: Several quandaries in regard to management are described, including the selection of dose, indications for prescribing an autoinjector, and decisions regarding when to inject epinephrine.
Abstract: Anaphylaxis is a severe, potentially fatal systemic allergic reaction that is rapid in onset and may cause death. Epinephrine is the primary medical therapy, and it must be administered promptly. This clinical report focuses on practical issues concerning the administration of self-injectable epinephrine for first-aid treatment of anaphylaxis in the community. The recommended epinephrine dose for anaphylaxis in children, based primarily on anecdotal evidence, is 0.01 mg/kg, up to 0.30 mg. Intramuscular injection of epinephrine into the lateral thigh (vastus lateralis) is the preferred route for therapy in first-aid treatment. Epinephrine autoinjectors are currently available in only 2 fixed doses: 0.15 and 0.30 mg. On the basis of current, albeit limited, data, it seems reasonable to recommend autoinjectors with 0.15 mg of epinephrine for otherwise healthy young children who weigh 10 to 25 kg (22–55 lb) and autoinjectors with 0.30 mg of epinephrine for those who weigh approximately 25 kg (55 lb) or more; however, specific clinical circumstances must be considered in these decisions. This report also describes several quandaries in regard to management, including the selection of dose, indications for prescribing an autoinjector, and decisions regarding when to inject epinephrine. Effective care for individuals at risk of anaphylaxis requires a comprehensive management approach involving families, allergic children, schools, camps, and other youth organizations. Risk reduction entails confirmation of the trigger, discussion of avoidance of the relevant allergen, a written individualized emergency anaphylaxis action plan, and education of supervising adults with regard to recognition and treatment of anaphylaxis.
TL;DR: High acceptability of autoinjector was observed and Secukinumab provided sustained improvements in signs and symptoms in active PsA patients through 52 weeks, and the safety profile was consistent with that reported previously.
Abstract: The study aimed to assess 52-week efficacy and safety of secukinumab self-administration by autoinjector in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in the FUTURE 3 study (
ClinicalTrials.gov
NCT01989468). Patients (≥ 18 years of age; N = 414) with active PsA were randomized 1:1:1 to subcutaneous (s.c.) secukinumab 300 mg, 150 mg, or placebo at baseline, weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4, and every 4 weeks thereafter. Per clinical response, placebo-treated patients were re-randomized to s.c. secukinumab 300 or 150 mg at week 16 (nonresponders) or week 24 (responders) and stratified at randomization by prior anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy (anti-TNF-naive, 68.1%; intolerant/inadequate response (anti-TNF-IR), 31.9%). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving at least 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR20) at week 24. Autoinjector usability was evaluated by Self-Injection Assessment Questionnaire (SIAQ). Overall, 92.1% (300 mg), 91.3% (150 mg), and 93.4% (placebo) of patients completed 24 weeks, and 84.9% (300 mg) and 79.7% (150 mg) completed 52 weeks. In the overall population (combined anti-TNF-naive and anti-TNF-IR), ACR20 response rate at week 24 was significantly higher in secukinumab groups (300 mg, 48.2% (p < 0.0001); 150 mg, 42% (p < 0.0001); placebo, 16.1%) and was sustained through 52 weeks. SIAQ results showed that more than 93% of patients were satisfied/very satisfied with autoinjector usage. Secukinumab was well tolerated with no new or unexpected safety signals reported. Secukinumab provided sustained improvements in signs and symptoms in active PsA patients through 52 weeks. High acceptability of autoinjector was observed. The safety profile was consistent with that reported previously. ClinicalTrials.gov
NCT01989468
. Registered 21 November 2013. EudraCT 2013–004002-25
. Registered 17 December 2013.
TL;DR: Although adrenaline is recommended as first line treatment for anaphylaxis, it is often not utilized and there has been a debate about when adrenaline autoinjectors should be prescribed and how many should be dispensed.
Abstract: Background Although adrenaline is recommended as first line treatment for anaphylaxis, it is often not utilized. There has been a debate about when adrenaline autoinjectors should be prescribed and how many should be dispensed. Objectives To see how many adrenaline autoinjectors were used during anaphylactic reactions and to determine why they were not used in situations where they were clinically indicated. Methods Patients were recruited prospectively at 14 paediatric allergy clinics throughout UK. Participants completed a questionnaire covering demographic data, atopic status and details of allergic reactions in the previous year and reasons for using more than one device. Results A total of 969 patients were recruited of whom 466 (48.1%, 95% CI: 37.9–58.2) had had at least one reaction in the previous year; 245 (25.3%, 95% CI: 16.2–34.4) of these reactions were anaphylaxis. An adrenaline autoinjector was used by 41 (16.7%, 95% CI: 11.7–21.3) participants experiencing anaphylaxis. Thirteen participants received more than one dose of adrenaline, for nine of these a health professional gave at least one. The commonest reasons for using more than one were severe breathing difficulties (40%), lack of improvement with first dose (20%) and miss-firing (13.3%). The commonest reasons for not using adrenaline in anaphylaxis were ‘thought adrenaline unnecessary’ (54.4%) and ‘unsure adrenaline necessary’ (19.1%). Many with wheeze did not use their autoinjector. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance Adrenaline is used by only a minority of patients experiencing anaphylaxis in the community. Thirteen of the 41 patients with anaphylaxis who used their autoinjector needed another dose of adrenaline. Further research is needed to consider how to best encourage the usage of adrenaline when clinically indicated in anaphylaxis.
TL;DR: The RAMPART (Rapid Anticonvulsant Medication Prior to Arrival Trial) as discussed by the authors is a double-blind randomized clinical trial to determine if the efficacy of IM midazolam is noninferior by a margin of 10% to that of intravenous (IV) lorazepam in patients treated by paramedics for status epilepticus (SE).
Abstract: Early treatment of prolonged seizures with benzodiazepines given intravenously by paramedics in the prehospital setting has been shown to be associated with improved outcomes. However, an increasing number of Emergency Medical System (EMS) protocols use an intramuscular (IM) route because it is faster and consistently achievable. RAMPART (Rapid Anticonvulsant Medication Prior to Arrival Trial) is a double-blind randomized clinical trial to determine if the efficacy of IM midazolam is noninferior by a margin of 10% to that of intravenous (IV) lorazepam in patients treated by paramedics for status epilepticus (SE). Children and adults with >5 min of convulsions who are still seizing after paramedic arrival are administered study medication by IM autoinjector or IV infusion. The primary efficacy outcome is absence of seizures at emergency department (ED) arrival, without EMS rescue therapy. Safety outcomes include acute endotracheal intubation and recurrent seizures. Secondary outcomes include timing of treatment and initial seizure cessation. At the time of writing this communication, enrollment of all subjects is near completion and the study data will soon be analyzed.