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 Randomized Controlled Trial of Three Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia Regimens for Labor
    Lim, Yvonne
    Ocampo, Cecilia E.
    Supandji, Mia
    Teoh, Wendy H. L.
    Sia, Alex T.
    ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2008, 107 (06): : 1968 - 1972
  • [42] Significance of patient-controlled sedation during colonoscopy - Results from a prospective randomized controlled study
    Crepeau, T
    Poincloux, L
    Bonny, C
    Lighetto, S
    Jaffeux, P
    Artigue, F
    Walleckx, P
    Bazin, JE
    Dapoigny, M
    Bommelaer, G
    GASTROENTEROLOGIE CLINIQUE ET BIOLOGIQUE, 2005, 29 (11): : 1090 - 1096
  • [43] A randomized comparison of target-controlled propofol infusion and patient-controlled sedation during ERCP
    Mazanikov, Max
    Udd, Marianne
    Kylanpaa, Leena
    Mustonen, Harri
    Lindstrom, Outi
    Farkkila, Martti
    Halttunen, Jorma
    Poyhia, Reino
    ENDOSCOPY, 2013, 45 (11) : 915 - 919
  • [44] A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Efficacy and Respiratory Effects of Patient-Controlled Intravenous Remifentanil Analgesia and Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia in Laboring Women
    Stocki, Daniel
    Matot, Idit
    Einav, Sharon
    Eventov-Friedman, Smadar
    Ginosar, Yehuda
    Weiniger, Carolyn F.
    ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2014, 118 (03): : 589 - 597
  • [45] Impact of a triage liaison physician on emergency department overcrowding and throughput: A randomized controlled trial
    Holroyd, Brian R.
    Bullard, Michael J.
    Latoszek, Karen
    Gordon, Debbie
    Allen, Sheri
    Tam, Siulin
    Blitz, Sandra
    Yoon, Philip
    Rowe, Brian H.
    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2007, 14 (08) : 702 - 708
  • [46] Sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a randomized controlled study of patient-controlled propofol sedation and that given by a nurse anesthetist
    Nilsson, Andreas
    Grossmann, Benjamin
    Kullman, Eric
    Uustal, Eva
    Sjoberg, Folke
    Nilsson, Lena
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2015, 50 (10) : 1285 - 1292
  • [47] Patient Navigation for Patients Frequently Visiting the Emergency Department: A Randomized, Controlled Trial
    Seaberg, David
    Elseroad, Stanton
    Dumas, Michael
    Mendiratta, Sudave
    Whittle, Jessica
    Hyatte, Cheryl
    Keys, Jan
    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2017, 24 (11) : 1327 - 1333
  • [48] The effect of audiovisual distraction on patient-controlled sedation under spinal anesthesia: a prospective, randomized trial
    Meier, Adam W.
    Buys, Michael J.
    Gill, Manasa
    Piacenza, Eric W.
    Nguyen, Linda
    Allen, Chelsea M.
    Stuart, Ami R.
    Gililland, Jeremy
    Johnson, Ken B.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MONITORING AND COMPUTING, 2021, 35 (02) : 355 - 361
  • [49] The effect of audiovisual distraction on patient-controlled sedation under spinal anesthesia: a prospective, randomized trial
    Adam W. Meier
    Michael J. Buys
    Manasa Gill
    Eric W. Piacenza
    Linda Nguyen
    Chelsea M. Allen
    Ami R. Stuart
    Jeremy Gililland
    Ken B. Johnson
    Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, 2021, 35 : 355 - 361
  • [50] A randomized trial comparing patient-controlled sedation using propofol/alfentanil to diazemul/pethidine in patients undergoing outpatient colonoscopy.
    Liu, GM
    Ching, JY
    Chan, SK
    Lau, JY
    Sun, LC
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2000, 51 (04) : AB62 - AB62