The Evaluation of 1-Physician Versus 2-Physician Deep Sedation with Propofol
Journal Title: International Journal of Anesthetics and Anesthesiology - Year 2016, Vol 3, Issue 1
Abstract
Background: Emergency physicians routinely perform emergency department procedural sedation (EDPS) with propofol and its safety is well established. However, in 2009 the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) enacted guidelines defining propofol as deep sedation and requiring administration by a physician. Common EDPS practice had been one-physician performing both the sedation and procedure. EDPS has proven safe under this 1-physician practice. However, the 2009 guidelines mandated separate physicians perform each. Objective: The study hypothesis was that 1-physician propofol sedation complication rates are similar to 2-physician. Methods: We performed an observational study of an a priori defined specific aims via secondary analysis of a prospectively collected database. Patients included were > 17 years of age consenting to EDPS with propofol. EDPS completed with one physician were compared to those completed with two (separate physicians performing the sedation and the procedure). All data was prospectively collected. The study was completed at an urban Level 1 trauma center. Standard monitoring and procedures for EDPS were followed with physicians blind to the objectives of this research. The frequency and incremental dosing of medication was left to the discretion of the treating physicians. The study protocol required an ED nurse trained in data collection to be present to record vital signs and assess for any prospectively defined complications. We used Chi-square tests to compare the binary outcomes and ASA score across the time periods and two-sample T-tests to test for differences in age between the two time periods. Results: During the 2-year study period we enrolled 481 patients, 252 1-physician EDPS sedations and 229 2-physician. All patients meeting inclusion criteria were included in the study. Total adverse event rates were 4.4%, and 3.1%, respectively (p = 0.450). The most common complications were hypotension and O2 desaturation and they respectively showed a 1-physcian rate of 2.0% and 0.8% and 2-physician rate of 1.8% and 0.9% (p = 0.848 and 0.923.) The unsuccessful procedural rates were 4.0% vs 3.9% (p = 0.983). Conclusions: This study demonstrated no significant difference in complication rate for propofol EDPS completed by one physician as compared to two.
A Retrospective Review of Corneal Abrasions after Oncologic Surgery in a Tertiary Cancer Center
Corneal abrasions are the single most common ocular injury in the perioperative period. The exact etiology of perioperative corneal abrasions is usually unclear, and several risk factors have been described. The aim of o...
Trachway Intubating Stylet Facilitates the Double-Lumen Endobronchial Tube Placement in Patients with Limited Mouth Opening
Intubation for one lung ventilation in patients with difficult airways can be a challenge. Severely limited mouth opening restricts the use of direct laryngoscopy or video-assisted laryngoscopy. We present two patients w...
Anesthesiologists as Operating Room Directors: Results of a Survey
Background: Many ideas have gone into the development of the concept of the Perioperative Surgical Home (PSH) and Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS). Many anesthesiologists have advocated for an increased role in ope...
Comparison of the Analgesic Effects of Preemptive Lornoxicam and Paracetamol after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
Objectives: Despite increasing knowledge about pain, postoperative pain management is still a challenge. Opioids are widely used drugs in the treatment, but the side effects of the opioids lead to investigations about th...
Pre-Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Sufentanil-2-Hydroxypropyl-Β-Cyclodextrin Inclusion Complex
This study evaluated the pre-clinical pharmacokinetics induced by sufentanil-2-hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin inclusion complex (SUFHP-β-CD) in comparison with its aqueous formulation (SUF) after intramuscular injection in...