title: Saline locks in prehospital care.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  1) To determine if paramedics could select appropriate patients for use of the saline lock; 2) to evaluate saline-lock patency upon arrival at the emergency department (ED); and 3) to define any cost-savings associated with the use of the saline lock.
  
  
  METHODS
  Patients in the prehospital setting who required intravenous (IV) access, but did not require fluid resuscitation. Patients with hypotension or multiple traumatic injuries were excluded.
  
  
  METHODS
  Paramedics were given the option for the use of either the saline lock or a routine IV set-up. Initially, the reservoir was flushed with 1 ml 0.9 N saline solution and the flush was repeated only if medications subsequently were completed for each patient. Information collected included: 1) demographics; 2) reason for selection; 3) need for fluid infusion; 4) conversion of the lock to a routine IV set-up; and 5) administration of medications through the lock. Failures included inability to flush after arrival to the ED, or local infiltration detected on flush while in the ED. Costs associated with the use of the saline locks were compared with those associated with the use of traditional IV set-ups. Cost-savings were calculated as the cost of a traditional IV set-up minus costs of the lock set-up.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 58 male and 42 female patients was enrolled. All patients were assigned appropriately. The most commonly used indications included chest pain, possible stroke, and shortness of breath. Two locks were occluded, and two had infiltrated when flushed following arrival of the patient to the ED. Five patients had IV fluid loads initiated through the locks. Cumulative cost-saving were [U.S.]$130 to the hospitals and $1,710 to the patients or their carriers. Most paramedics were pleased with the performance and utility of the locks.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The use of saline locks is an alternative to the use of traditional IVs in certain patients in the prehospital setting.
authors.affiliation: Wright State University, Department of Emergency Medicine/Kettering Medical Center, Dayton, Ohio, USA.
authors.forename: M F
authors.initials: MF
authors.lastname: Boyle
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Kuntz
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D002406:Catheterization, Peripheral / Q000295:instrumentation*; D002408:Catheters, Indwelling / Q000191:economics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D017046:Cost Savings; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D004632:Emergency Medical Services / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods*; D004634:Emergency Medical Technicians; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007262:Infusions, Intravenous / Q000191:economics / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012462:Saline Solution, Hypertonic