PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Reddick, Andrew D AU - Ronald, Julie AU - Morrison, William G TI - Intravenous fluid resuscitation: was Poiseuille right? AID - 10.1136/emj.2009.083485 DP - 2011 Mar 01 TA - Emergency Medicine Journal PG - 201--202 VI - 28 IP - 3 4099 - http://emj.bmj.com/content/28/3/201.short 4100 - http://emj.bmj.com/content/28/3/201.full SO - Emerg Med J2011 Mar 01; 28 AB - Aim To compare the flow rates of readily available intravenous infusion devices and to compare the effect of the addition of pressure or a needle-free intravenous connector device.Methods Several intravenous devices with different characteristics had their flow rates determined under a standard set of conditions. The flow rates were then measured with the addition of a pressure bag to the system and then with a needle-free intravenous connector device. The flow rates and change in flow rates were then analysed.Results The results showed a general agreement with Poiseuille's law. The needle-free connector slowed the rate of flow by up to 41.4% with the greatest effect on short, wide-bore devices. The addition of pressure had a greater effect on longer devices.Conclusions Short, wide cannulae should be used when rapid fluid resuscitation is required. Needle-free devices should not be used when rapid fluid resuscitation is needed.