A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Patient-Controlled and Physician-Controlled Sedation in the Emergency Department

被引:5
作者
Bell, Anthony [1 ,2 ]
Lipp, Trent [1 ]
Greenslade, Jaimi [1 ,2 ]
Chu, Kevin [1 ,2 ]
Rothwell, Sean [1 ,2 ]
Duncan, Alison [1 ]
机构
[1] Royal Brisbane & Womens Hosp, Dept Emergency Med, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
[2] Univ Queensland, Sch Med, Burns Trauma & Crit Care Res Ctr, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
关键词
CONTROLLED CONSCIOUS SEDATION; PROCEDURAL SEDATION; CONTROLLED PROPOFOL;
D O I
10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.04.020
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Study objective: We compare patient-controlled sedation (PCS) and emergency physician-controlled sedation (EPCS) with respect to propofol requirements, depth of sedation, adverse events, recovery time, physician satisfaction, and patient satisfaction in emergency department (ED) patients requiring brief but painful procedures. Methods: One hundred sixty-six patients in this randomized controlled trial received propofol sedation according to one of 2 regimens: infusion of propofol at doses determined by the treating physician (EPCS group) or infusion of propofol with a patient-controlled infusion pump (PCS group). The PCS group received an initial physician-controlled bolus following by self-administered doses. Depth of sedation was assessed at 3-minute intervals. Adverse events were recorded as they occurred. Physician and patient satisfaction were recorded with 100-mm visual analog scales. Results: There was a nonsignificant trend toward lower total propofol doses with PCS relative to EPCS (medians 1.36 versus 1.60 mg/kg, respectively; median difference -0.15 mg/kg; 95% confidence interval of the difference -0.33 to 0.05 mg/kg; P=.14). Adverse events, requirement for treatment of adverse events, and recovery time did not differ in the 2 groups. Depth of sedation was lower in the PCS group. Procedural success, ease of procedure, and patient satisfaction were similar in both groups despite nearly twice as many patients recalling the procedure in the PCS group and 15% of patients requiring additional physician-administered doses in the PCS group. Conclusion: Compared with EPCS, PCS demonstrated similar propofol dosing, safety, recovery, and satisfaction but resulted in lighter sedation. Propofol PCS appears safe and effective for ED procedures requiring moderate rather than deep sedation. [Ann Emerg Med. 2010;56:502-508.]
引用
收藏
页码:502 / 508
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A study protocol for a feasibility study: Propofol Target-Controlled Infusion in Emergency Department Sedation (ProTEDS)—a multi-centre feasibility study protocol
    Fiona M. Burton
    David J. Lowe
    Jonathan Millar
    Alasdair R. Corfield
    Malcolm A. B. Sim
    Pilot and Feasibility Studies, 5
  • [42] A study protocol for a feasibility study: Propofol Target-Controlled Infusion in Emergency Department Sedation (ProTEDS)-a multi-centre feasibility study protocol
    Burton, Fiona M.
    Lowe, David J.
    Millar, Jonathan
    Corfield, Alasdair R.
    Sim, Malcolm A. B.
    PILOT AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES, 2019, 5 (01)
  • [43] Comparison of cerebral oxygen desaturation events between children under general anesthesia and chloral hydrate sedation-a randomized controlled trial
    Gude, Philipp
    Weber, Thomas P.
    Dazert, Stefan
    Teig, Norbert
    Mathmann, Philipp
    Georgevici, Adrian I.
    Neumann, Katrin
    BMC PEDIATRICS, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [44] Oral midazolam vs. intranasal dexmedetomidine plus oral midazolam for sedation of pediatric outpatients: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial
    Nie, Juan
    Chen, Chanchan
    Xie, Jing
    Ding, Guicong
    BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2023, 23 (01)
  • [45] A Comparison of Intranasal Dexmedetomidine and Dexmedetomidine-Ketamine Combination Sedation for Transthoracic Echocardiography in Pediatric Patients With Congenital Heart Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Sun, Mang
    Liu, Hui
    Yu, Qing
    Liu, Yang
    Zhang, Jing
    Lei, Yao
    Zhao, Qing-yan
    Li, Shang-yingying
    Tu, Sheng-fen
    Wei, Guang-hui
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, 2020, 34 (06) : 1550 - 1555
  • [46] Bolus administration of remimazolam was superior to midazolam for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing diagnostic bronchoscopy: A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial
    Wu, Qiuyue
    Xu, Rong
    Zhou, Xuefei
    Wang, Longfei
    Sheng, Cheng
    Ding, Miao
    Cao, Yunfei
    MEDICINE, 2024, 103 (12) : E37215
  • [47] End-tidal carbon dioxide monitoring improves patient safety during propofol-based sedation for breast lumpectomy A randomised controlled trial
    Li, Mengzhu
    Liu, Zhiqiang
    Lin, Fuqing
    Wang, Huiying
    Niu, Xiaozhen
    Ge, Xun
    Fu, Shukun
    Fang, Lin
    Li, Cheng
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2018, 35 (11) : 848 - 855
  • [48] The effect of general anesthesia and conscious sedation in endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and trial sequential analysis
    Peng, Zhi
    Luo, Wenmiao
    Yan, Zhengcun
    Zhang, Hengzhu
    FRONTIERS IN NEUROLOGY, 2023, 14
  • [49] Effect of esketamine vs dexmedetomidine adjunct to propofol sedation for pediatric 3Tesla magnetic resonance imaging: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial
    Xu, Shang-xian
    Shan, Xi-sheng
    Gao, Jin-meng
    Liu, Hua-xian
    Chen, Wei-rong
    Gao, Shan-shan
    Ji, Fu-hai
    Peng, Ke
    Wang, Qian
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2022, 27 (01)
  • [50] Cardiopulmonary Adverse Events of Remimazolam versus Propofol During Cervical Conization: A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Wang, Lini
    Wang, Yi
    Ma, Li
    Wang, Yiting
    Mu, Xiaoxiao
    Huang, Zhaoxu
    Zheng, Ziyu
    Nie, Huang
    DRUG DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND THERAPY, 2023, 17 : 1233 - 1243