Connect
MJA
MJA

Optimal technique for intramuscular injection of infants and toddlers: a randomised trial

Ian F Cook and John Murtagh
Med J Aust 2005; 183 (2): 60-63.

Summary

Objective: To compare the rates of adverse reactions and parental approval ratings for three different techniques for anterolateral thigh vaccination in children aged 2, 4, 6 and 18 months.

Design: Randomised, observer-blind trial.

Participants: 375 children who received pertussis-containing vaccines in a regional New South Wales town between 29 May 2001 and 30 June 2002.

Interventions: Children were randomised to receive intramuscular injection with acellular pertussis-containing and Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccines with one of three recognised injection techniques (Australian, World Health Organization or United States).

Main outcome measures: Local adverse reactions (bruising and redness/swelling), systemic adverse reactions (irritability, perceived fever, persistent crying/screaming, drowsiness, vomiting/poor feeding) and parental acceptance were assessed 24 hours after injection.

Results: 361 children (96%) were evaluated 24 hours after vaccination. The WHO technique resulted in significantly fewer children, than with the other two techniques, with the systemic adverse reaction variable “irritability” (P = 0.0039). There was a significant difference between the technique groups overall for the local adverse reaction “bruising” with acellular pertussis-containing vaccines (P = 0.0418), due to a lower reaction rate in the WHO group compared with the US group (P = 0.0356).

Conclusion: The WHO technique appears to be the optimal technique for anterolateral thigh injection in children — it ensures that the injection is intramuscular, results in fewer adverse reactions, and is the easiest technique to perform as it does not require angling of the needle to the long axis of the femur.

  • Ian F Cook1
  • John Murtagh2

  • 1 Discipline of General Practice, School of Medical Practice and Population Health, Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW.
  • 2 Department of General Practice, School of Primary Health Care, Monash University, East Bentleigh, VIC.

Correspondence: 

Acknowledgements: 

We wish to thank all the parents/guardians who so willingly allowed their children to participate in the study. We would also like to thank the Hunter Division of General Practice for providing funding for the statistical analysis conducted by Datapharm Australia.

Competing interests:

None identified.

  • 1. Sauer LW. Immunization in early childhood. Ill Med J 1950; 97: 73-76.
  • 2. Gilles FH, Matson DD. Sciatic nerve injury following misplaced gluteal injection. J Pediatr 1970; 76: 247-254.
  • 3. Marcuse EK, MacDonald NE. Neurological injury after vaccination in buttocks [letter]. CMAJ 1996; 155: 374.
  • 4. American Academy of Pediatrics. Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases. ELK Grove Village, Ill: American Academy of Pediatrics 1994; 11: 19-21.
  • 5. National Health and Medical Research Council. The Australian Immunisation Handbook, 8th edition. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council, 2003: 9.
  • 6. Talbert JL, Haslam RHA, Haller JA. Gangrene of the foot following intramuscular injection in to the lateral thigh: a case report with recommendation for prevention. J Pediatr 1967; 70: 110-114.
  • 7. Hick JF, Charboneau JW, Brakke DM, et al. Optimum needle length for diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis inoculation of infants. Pediatrics 1989; 84: 136-137.
  • 8. Groswasser J, Kahn A, Bouche B, et al. Needle length and injection technique for efficient intramuscular vaccine delivery in infants and children evaluated through an ultrasonographic determination of subcutaneous and muscle layer thickness. Pediatrics 1997; 100: 400-403.
  • 9. Cook IF, Murtagh J. Needle length required for intramuscular vaccination of infants and toddlers. An ultrasonographic study. Aust Fam Physician 2002; 31: 295-297.
  • 10. World Health Organization. When and how to give vaccines. In: Immunisaton in practice. A guide for health workers who give vaccines. Geneva: WHO, 1984; 3. (PI/PHWE/84/3rev.1.)
  • 11. Diggle L, Deeks J. Effect of needle length on incidence of local reactions to routine immunization in infants aged 4 months: randomized controlled trial. BMJ 2000; 34: 931-933.
  • 12. Harris G, Nolan T, Hartman L. Clinical signs associated with triple antigen (DTP) vaccination in infants. J Paediatr Child Health 1995; 31: 228-232.
  • 13. Freeman T, Cuff W, Duchos P, et al. A comparison of local reactions to two formulations of DPT vaccine. Can Commun Dis Rep 1996; 20: 29-32.
  • 14. Cook IF, Murtagh J. Comparative reactogenicity and parental acceptability of pertussis vaccines administered into the ventrogluteal area and anterolateral thigh in children aged 2, 4, 6 and 18 months. Vaccine 2003; 21: 3330-3334.
  • 15. Chen RT, Rastogi SC, Mullen JR, et al. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Vaccine 1994; 12: 542-550.
  • 16. Lawrence GL, Hull BP, Macintyre CR, et al. Reasons for incomplete immunization among Australian children. Aust Fam Physician 2004; 33: 568-571.

Author

remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Comment
Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Responses are now closed for this article.