scholarly journals Inadvertent injection of COVID-19 vaccine into deltoid muscle vasculature may result in vaccine distribution to distance tissues and consequent adverse reactions

2021 ◽  
pp. postgradmedj-2021-141119
Author(s):  
Hamid Merchant
PEDIATRICS ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 83 (5) ◽  
pp. 679-682 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moshe M. Ipp ◽  
Ronald Gold ◽  
Morton Goldbach ◽  
David C. Maresky ◽  
Norman Saunders ◽  
...  

Adverse reactions after diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, polio vaccination at 18 months of age were investigated in three groups: 74 children injected in the deltoid muscle with a 16-mm (5/8-in) needle, 64 in the anterolateral thigh with a 16-mm needle, and 67 in the anterolateral thigh with a 25-mm (1-in) needle. No significant differences in systemic reactions were observed. Severe pain occurred in 30.5% of the groups injected in the thigh compared with only 8.1% of the group injected in the arm (P < .001). Children vaccinated in the thigh had decreased movement of the extremity significantly more often than those injected in the arm (49.9% v 25.6%, P < .005), and two thirds of the former limped for 24 to 48 hours. Redness and swelling were observed more often after injection in the arm than in the thigh (58.1% v 26.7%, P < .0005). The only effect of changing needle length in the groups injected in the thigh was the occurrence of more redness and swelling in children vaccinated with the 16-mm needle compared with the 25-mm needle. Overall, parents rated more reactions as moderate to severe among children injected in the thigh than among children injected in the arm (64.2% v 37.9%, P < .001). The deltoid muscle appears to be the preferred site for administration of diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, polio vaccine at 18 months of age.


2010 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 10-11
Author(s):  
JENNIE SMITH
Keyword(s):  

2007 ◽  
Vol 40 (7) ◽  
pp. 18-19
Author(s):  
ELIZABETH MECHCATIE
Keyword(s):  

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larissa J. Maier ◽  
Michael P. Schaub

Abstract. Pharmacological neuroenhancement, defined as the misuse of prescription drugs, illicit drugs, or alcohol for the purpose of enhancing cognition, mood, or prosocial behavior, is not widespread in Europe – nevertheless, it does occur. Thus far, no drug has been proven as safe and effective for cognitive enhancement in otherwise healthy individuals. European studies have investigated the misuse of prescription and illicit stimulants to increase cognitive performance as well as the use of tranquilizers, alcohol, and cannabis to cope with stress related to work or education. Young people in educational settings report pharmacological neuroenhancement more frequently than those in other settings. Although the regular use of drugs for neuroenhancement is not common in Europe, the irregular and low-dose usage of neuroenhancers might cause adverse reactions. Previous studies have revealed that obtaining adequate amounts of sleep and using successful learning techniques effectively improve mental performance, whereas pharmacological neuroenhancement is associated with ambiguous effects. Therefore, non-substance-related alternatives should be promoted to cope with stressful situations. This paper reviews the recent research on pharmacological neuroenhancement in Europe, develops a clear definition of the substances used, and formulates recommendations for practitioners regarding how to react to requests for neuroenhancement drug prescriptions. We conclude that monitoring the future development of pharmacological neuroenhancement in Europe is important to provide effective preventive measures when required. Furthermore, substance use to cope with stress related to work or education should be studied in depth because it is likely more prevalent and dangerous than direct neuroenhancement.


JAMA ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 198 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Westerman
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document