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.