Is it safe to use propofol in the emergency department? a randomized controlled trial to compare propofol and midazolam

被引:13
|
作者
Hisamuddin N. [1 ,3 ]
Rahman N.A. [1 ,3 ]
Hashim A. [2 ]
机构
[1] Consultant and Head of Emergency Medicine, PPSP, USM, Kubang Kerian
[2] Department of Emergency and Trauma, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah
[3] Department of Emergency Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, USM
关键词
Emergency department; Midazolam; Procedural sedation analgesia; Propofol;
D O I
10.1007/s12245-010-0162-3
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background This study examined the safety and effectiveness of the procedural sedation analgesia (PSA) technique carried out in the emergency department (ED) of a university hospital over a period of 1 year. The research was done to compare the effectiveness and efficacy of moderate sedation of fentanyl combined with either mid-azolam or propofol for any brief, intense procedure in the ED setting. Aims The objectives were to observe the occurrence of adverse events in subjects undergoing PSA for intense and painful procedures in the emergency department and to implement the use of capnography as a method of monitoring the patients when they were under PSA. Methods Forty patients were selected for this study. They were randomly divided into two equal groups using the computer-generated random permuted blocks of four patients. Twenty patients were grouped together as group A and the remaining 20 patients as group B. Drugs used were single blinded to prevent any bias. Drug A was propofol and fentanyl, while drug B was midazolam and fentanyl. The procedures involved included orthopedic manipulation such as reduction of fractures, reduction of dislocated joints, abscess drainage, wound debridement, laceration wound repair and cardioversion. All of the subjects were monitored for their vital signs and end tidal carbon dioxide level every 10 min till the PSA was completed. The duration of stay in the ED was documented when the subjects had completed the procedure and were released from the department. Result Of the study population, 75.6% were males. The mean age was 37.8 years (95% CI 33.2, 39.8). None of the patients developed any major complications while under PSA. The vital signs pre-, intra- and post-procedure were not significantly different in either the propofol or miz-adolam groups (p value >0.05). Conclusion This study had proven that there was no difference in adverse event occurrence between the studied drugs during PSA. Propofol can be recommended for use in PSA if the operator is well trained and familiar with the drug. © Springer-Verlag London Ltd 2010.
引用
收藏
页码:105 / 113
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Randomized clinical trial of etomidate versus propofol for procedural sedation in the emergency department
    Miner, James R.
    Danahy, Mark
    Moch, Abby
    Biros, Michelle
    ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2007, 49 (01) : 15 - 22
  • [22] Ketamine/Propofol Versus Midazolam/Fentanyl for Procedural Sedation and Analgesia in the Emergency Department: A Randomized, Prospective, Double-Blind Trial
    Nejati, Amir
    Moharari, Reza Shariat
    Ashraf, Haleh
    Labaf, Ali
    Golshani, Keihan
    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2011, 18 (08) : 800 - 806
  • [23] Propofol and Midazolam versus propofol alone for sedation following coronary artery bypass grafting: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial
    Walder, B
    Borgeat, A
    Suter, PM
    Romand, JA
    ANAESTHESIA AND INTENSIVE CARE, 2002, 30 (02) : 171 - 178
  • [24] Propofol versus Midazolam in Medical Thoracoscopy: A Randomized, Noninferiority Trial
    Grendelmeier, Peter
    Tamm, Michael
    Jahn, Kathleen
    Pflimlin, Eric
    Stolz, Daiana
    RESPIRATION, 2014, 88 (02) : 126 - 136
  • [25] USE OF PROPOFOL VS MIDAZOLAM FOR PREMEDICATION A PLACEBO CONTROLLED, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE BLINDED STUDY
    Lazo, O. L. Elvir
    White, P. F.
    Tang, J.
    Cao, X.
    Yumul, F.
    Yumul, R.
    Wender, R. H.
    ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 2016, 122
  • [26] A Randomized controlled trial on procedural sedation among adult patients in emergency departments: Comparing fentanyl with midazolam versus fentanyl with propofol
    Ab-Rahman, N. H.
    Hashim, A.
    ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2008, 51 (04) : 479 - 480
  • [27] Randomized clinical trial of propofol versus alfentanil for moderate procedural sedation in the emergency department
    Miner, James R.
    Driver, Brian E.
    Moore, Johanna C.
    Faegerstrom, Erik
    Klein, Lauren
    Prekker, Matthew
    Cole, Jon B.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2017, 35 (10): : 1451 - 1456
  • [28] Randomized Clinical Trial of Propofol With and Without Alfentanil for Deep Procedural Sedation in the Emergency Department
    Miner, James R.
    Gray, Richard O.
    Stephens, Dana
    Biros, Michelle H.
    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2009, 16 (09) : 825 - 834
  • [29] Propofol versus midazolam for procedural sedation in the emergency department: A study on efficacy and safety
    Lameijer, Heleen
    Sikkema, Ytje T.
    Pol, Albert
    Bosch, Maike G. E.
    Beije, Femke
    Feenstra, Rieneke
    Bens, Bas W. J.
    ter Avest, Ewoud
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2017, 35 (05): : 692 - 696
  • [30] Comparison of dexmedetomidine, midazolam, and propofol as an optimal sedative for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: A randomized controlled trial
    Samson, Sumanth
    George, Sagiev Koshy
    Vinoth, B.
    Khan, Mohd Saif
    Akila, Bridgitte
    JOURNAL OF DIGESTIVE ENDOSCOPY, 2014, 5 (02) : 51 - 57