ArticleSAGE open medicine2022
Safety evaluation of antibacterial and analgesic autoinjector devices for rapid administration during emergency situations: a crossover study in rabbits.
Article in SAGE open medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Study on Biofilm Formation Among Enterococcus Isolates and Association With Their Antibiotic Resistance Patterns.Cureus · 2024Article
- In Silico Molecular Docking of Phytochemicals of Murraya koenigii Against Streptococcus mutans.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of autoinjector devices (AIDs) in rabbits by intramuscular (i.m.) administration, using haematological and biochemical markers. Introduction: Emergency and mass casualty situations require immediate drug delivery for which AIDs are preferred. The tolerability of amikacin as antibacterial and buprenorphine as analgesic AID has been studied in rats by intraperitoneal administration. In the present study, it was evaluated in rabbits by i.m. administration. Methods: Water-filled glass cartridges (2.3-2.4 mL) were converted to amikacin (106 mg/mL) and buprenorphine (0.128 mg/mL) cartridges. Dual dose AID was used for i.m. administration (1.2 mL). The study was done as a crossover design on 12 rabbits. Initially, three rabbits each were given manually or AID, 57 mg/kg amikacin, and three rabbits each by manual or by AID, 0.07 mg/kg buprenorphine for 7 days. After 1 month, the injections were changed in the rabbits. In the place of manual injection, AID and in the place of amikacin, buprenorphine injection was given. This ensured that all rabbits received 14 injections, 7 manual and 7 AID consisting of 7 amikacin and 7 buprenorphine. 24 h before and 24 h after last drug administrations, blood was withdrawn from ear vein for haematological and biochemical estimations. Results: The rabbits were healthy, active and no sign of any injection-related changes were observed after administration of amikacin and buprenorphine by manually or by AID. The haematological and biochemical parameters showed similar changes in manual and AID administration of amikacin and buprenorphine. Conclusion: The present study of amikacin and buprenorphine by AID shows the safety of the device and is recommended for further experimentation. These AIDs are intended for self-administration during emergency and mass causality situation and are suitable for adults and children, as well as farm and pet animals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.