A study of the Bispectral Index Monitor during procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department

Comparison of Analgesic Efficacy of Ultrasound Guided PEC II Block Using Dexamethasone as an Adjuvant to Ropivacaine Versus Plain Ropivacaine in Patients Undergoing Modified Radical Mastectomy: A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

 Pain after breast cancer surgery is one of the main reasons for postoperative morbidity and pulmonary complications leading to increased hospital stay. Therefore, effective management of postoperative pain becomes necessary to alleviate patients' suffering and allow early mobilization and hospital discharge. Traditionally, opioids have been used to manage perioperative pain but they are associated with side effects. So, an opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia approach is used nowadays. Ultrasound-guided pectoral type-II (PEC II) block is increasingly being used to address acute postoperative pain after breast cancer surgery. However, to date, not many studies have been done regarding prolonging the duration of analgesia of PEC II blocks for postoperative pain relief in patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy (MRM). So, we undertook this study to compare the analgesic efficacy of PEC II block using dexamethasone as an adjuvant to ropivacaine versus plain ropivacaine in patients undergoing MRM.

METHODS

 After obtaining approval from the institute ethics committee and written informed consent from the patients, this prospective, double-blind, parallel group, randomized controlled study was carried out at All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) Raipur, from March 2021 to March 2022. Sixty-four female patients, aged 18 years and above, belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologists, physical status I, II, and III, undergoing unilateral, elective MRM under general anesthesia, were randomly allocated to two groups A and B, with 32 patients in each to receive 30 mL of 0.25% ropivacaine plus 2 mL (8 mg) of dexamethasone and 30 mL of 0.25% ropivacaine plus 2 mL of normal saline, respectively. The primary outcome measure was total opioid consumption till 12 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcome measures were the difference in pain scores based on the numeric rating scale till 12 hours postoperatively, post-operative sedation scores, the incidence of postoperative nausea vomiting (PONV), and other adverse events (if any).

RESULTS

The mean (SD) of morphine (mg) consumed intraoperatively was 5.50 (1.05) and 5.95 (0.86) with P = 0.033 and that consumed postoperatively was 1.00 (0.00) and 1.69 (0.93) with P <0.001 in group A and B respectively, with morphine consumption being higher in the group. The difference in the NRS score for pain at rest was statistically significant at 2 h (P=0.030), 4 h (P=0.004), 6 h (P=0.002), and, 12 h (P=0.039) time points with the score being higher in group B. The groups were comparable in terms of postoperative sedation score (P > 0.05) and incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. None of the patients in group A and 6.2% of the patients in group B had nausea (P = 0.492). None of the patients in either of the groups had vomiting. No other complication occurred during the entire study in either of the groups.

CONCLUSION

In comparison to plain ropivacaine, the addition of dexamethasone as an adjuvant to ropivacaine for PEC II block in patients undergoing MRM significantly reduced perioperative opioid consumption and postoperative NRS scores. No significant change was noted in terms of postoperative sedation score, incidence of PONV, and other side effects between the groups. Therefore, we conclude that the analgesic efficacy of US-guided PEC II block using dexamethasone, as an adjuvant to ropivacaine is superior to that of plain ropivacaine in patients undergoing MRM.

Correlating the Depth of Sedation Between the Ramsay Sedation Scale and Bispectral Index Using Either Intravenous Midazolam or Intravenous Propofol in Elderly Patients Under Spinal Anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

Supplementation of spinal anaesthesia with sedatives or anxiolytics has emerged as a standard protocol to alleviate patients' anxiety and to produce amnesia during the surgical procedure. Thus, judicious use of sedation can make surgeries under spinal anaesthesia more comfortable and acceptable for the elderly patient, the surgeon, and the anaesthesiologist. However, over-sedation may jeopardise the safety of the patient. Appropriate sedation helps reduce physiological stress, which leads to a better result. Therefore, monitoring the depth of sedation becomes essential. The Ramsay sedation scale (RSS) and bispectral index (BIS) both are used widely to assess the depth of sedation.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of the study was to assess and correlate the depth of sedation between the BIS and RSS in elderly patients using midazolam and propofol under spinal anaesthesia. The secondary objectives were to observe any difference in the commencement of sedation between the two groups and to observe haemodynamic changes between the two groups.

METHODS

A total of 60 elderly patients undergoing urological procedures under spinal anaesthesia were randomly assigned to receive either midazolam (Group A, n=30) or propofol (Group B, n=30) for sedation. In Group A, patients were given an initial bolus of midazolam 0.03 mg/kg and a maintenance incremental bolus of 0.01 mg/kg up to a maximum of 2.5 mg in 10-minute intervals. Group B used propofol with an initial bolus dose of 0.5 mg/kg over two minutes and a maintenance bolus of 10-20 mg as required for the maintenance of sedation depth. Sedation was titrated to achieve a BIS score of 70-80 and an RSS score of 3-4. Heart rate, non-invasive systolic, diastolic, mean arterial blood pressure, oxygen saturation (SPO2), and the correlation coefficient between the BIS and RSS were measured at 0 (baseline), 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 minutes of interval.

RESULTS

The correlation coefficient between the BIS and RSS scores in Group A at various time intervals indicate a strong correlation coefficient of -0.76 at five minutes, -0.64 at 20 minutes, -0.78 at 30 minutes, -0.56 at 40 minutes, and -0.39 at 50 minutes. In Group B, the correlation coefficient between the BIS and RSS scores at various time intervals indicate a strong correlation coefficient of -0.75 at five minutes, -0.76 at 20 minutes,-0.64 at 30 minutes, -0.89 at 40 minutes, and -0.46 at 50 minutes of interval. We also observed that the BIS drops to a lower level in patients receiving propofol (Group B) with a significant difference depicting early onset of sedation with propofol. In Group B, HR and MAP were significantly less than those of Group A. There was no significant difference in terms of mean age, sex, and body weight in the patients of both groups.

CONCLUSION

The BIS and RSS scores indicate a strong correlation with a magnitude of 70%-80%, but more in Group B (propofol) than Group A (midazolam). Therefore, the characteristics of each sedative drug can influence the level of sedation during spinal anaesthesia. Clinicians should use a combination of BIS values and other objective sedative methods to determine the degree of sedation, rather than relying exclusively on BIS values.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Pregabalin and Gabapentin for Preemptive Analgesia in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Patients: A Randomised Double-Blind Study

Introduction Preemptive analgesia is now an essential step of perioperative pain management. Pregabalin and gabapentin, which are drugs primarily used in the treatment of neuropathic pain, are now being contemplated for use as preemptive analgesics. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of gabapentin and pregabalin as preemptive analgesics. The primary objective of the study was to compare pregabalin and gabapentin versus placebo with regard to a visual analogue scale (VAS) score for postoperative pain for 24 hours, time to first rescue analgesia, and total analgesic consumption over 24 hours. The level of sedation with the help of a modified Ramsay sedation score was also compared. Methods This randomised, double-blind study was conducted on 90 patients aged 18-60 years of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia at a tertiary health care institute. The patients were randomly divided into three groups of 30 each, namely, Group A (gabapentin - oral two capsules of 300 mg gabapentin), Group B (pregabalin - oral two capsules of 150 mg pregabalin), and Group C (placebo - oral two capsules). The various parameters that were recorded in both groups included a VAS score for pain, total dose of tramadol consumed in 24 hours, modified Ramsay sedation scores in the immediate postoperative period, and adverse effects related to the study drugs (at zero and one hour and two, four, six, 12, and 24 hours). The data were analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) (version 25; IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Armonk, NY) software. Results VAS scores were significantly lower in groups A and B when compared to Group C. However, the scores were comparable in Group A (gabapentin) and Group B (pregabalin). The difference in the mean time of rescue analgesia was statistically highly significant when Group A (gabapentin) was compared with Group C (placebo) (P value<0.001) and when Group B (pregabalin) was compared with Group C (placebo) (P value<0.001). Thus, gabapentin and pregabalin provide a longer postoperative pain-free period (382.6 min and 502.3 min, respectively) when compared to the placebo group (137.8 min). Moreover, the mean dose of tramadol consumption in 24 hours was significantly lower in pregabalin (170 mg) and gabapentin groups (176.7 mg) when compared to the placebo group (286.7 mg). However, there was no significant difference in the total tramadol consumption between the gabapentin and pregabalin groups. The level of sedation up to six hours postoperatively was higher in Group B (pregabalin) and Group A (gabapentin) patients compared to Group C (placebo). On comparing the mean Ramsay sedation scores of Group A (gabapentin) versus Group C (placebo) and Group B (pregabalin) versus Group C (placebo), it was found that there was a highly significant difference at zero and one-hour time intervals (P value<0.001 in both comparisons). Conclusion A single preoperative dose of pregabalin 300 mg or gabapentin 600 mg can be used for effective preemptive analgesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Effects of oxycodone pharmacogenetics on postoperative analgesia and related clinical outcomes in children: a pilot prospective study

Background: Variability in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oxycodone in children undergoing surgery could be due to genetic polymorphisms. Materials & methods: The authors studied the association between clinical outcomes and pharmacogenes in children undergoing major surgery. A total of 89 children (35 undergoing pectus excavatum repair and 54 undergoing spinal fusion) were recruited. Results: OPRM1 SNP rs6902403 showed an association with maximum pain score and total morphine equivalent dose (p < 0.05). Other polymorphisms in OPRM1 SNP, PXR, COMT and ABCB1 were also shown to be associated with average morphine equivalent dose, length of hospital stay and maximum surgical pain (p < 0.05). Conclusion: This study demonstrates novel associations between the above pharmacogenes and oxycodone's pharmacokinetics as well as postoperative outcomes in children. Clinical trial registration: NCT03495388 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Safety and efficacy of target controlled infusion administration of propofol and remifentanil for moderate sedation in non-hospital dental practice

Background

Fearful and anxious patients who find dental treatment intolerable without sedative and analgesic support may benefit from moderate sedation. Target controlled infusion (TCI) pumps are superior to bolus injection in maintaining low plasma and effect-site concentration variability, resulting in stable, steady-state drug concentrations. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of moderate sedation with remifentanil and propofol using TCI pumps in non-hospital dental settings.

Methods

A prospective chart review was conducted on 101 patients sedated with propofol and remifentanil using TCI pumps. The charts were completed at two oral surgeons and one general dentist's office over 6 months. Hypoxia, hypotension, bradycardia, and over-sedation were considered adverse events and were collected using Tracking and Reporting Outcomes of Procedural Sedation (TROOPS). Furthermore, patient recovery time, sedation length, drug dose, and patient satisfaction questionnaires were used to measure sedation effectiveness.

Results

Of the 101 reviewed sedation charts, 54 were of men, and 47 were of women. The mean age of the patients was 40.5 ±18.7 years, and their mean BMI was 25.6 ± 4.4. The patients did not experience hypoxia, bradycardia, and hypotension during the 4694 min of sedation. The average minimum Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) and heartbeats were 75.1 mmHg and 60.4 bpm, respectively. 98% of patients agreed that the sedation technique met their needs in reducing their anxiety, and 99% agreed that they were satisfied with the sedation 24 hours later. The average sedation time was 46.9 ± 55.6 min, and the average recovery time was 12.4 ± 4.4 min. Remifentanil and propofol had mean initial effect-site concentration doses of 0.96 µ/ml and 1.0 ng/ml respectively. The overall total amount of drug administered was significantly higher in longer sedation procedures compared to shorter ones, while the infusion rate decreased as the procedural stimulus decreased.

Conclusion

According to the results of this study, no patients experienced adverse events during sedation, and all patients were kept at a moderate sedation level for a wide range of sedation times and differing procedures. The results showed that TCI pumps are safe and effective for administering propofol and remifentanil for moderate sedation in dentistry.

Atomised intranasal dexmedetomidine versus oral melatonin in prevention of emergence delirium in children undergoing ophthalmic surgery with sevoflurane: A randomised double-blind study

BACKGROUND

Melatonin and dexmedetomidine have both been used as a premedication to decrease emergence delirium in children. The effectiveness of oral melatonin, compared with atomised intranasal dexmedetomidine, in this role is not well studied.

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy of pre-operative atomised intranasal dexmedetomidine versus oral melatonin in children scheduled for ophthalmic surgery under sevoflurane.

DESIGN

A prospective, randomised, double-blind trial.

SETTING

Ophthalmic surgery in a university teaching hospital, April 2021 to October 2021.

PATIENTS

A total of 120 children undergoing ophthalmic surgery with sevoflurane anaesthesia.

INTERVENTION

Children were randomised to receive pre-operative intranasal dexmedetomidine 2 μg/kg via an atomiser device (dexmedetomidine group) or oral melatonin 0.5 mg kg -1 (melatonin group), 45 min before surgery.

OUTCOMES MEASURED

The primary outcome was the incidence of emergence delirium assessed by the Paediatric Anaesthesia Emergence Delirium scale. Secondary outcomes included pre-operative sedation, quality of inhalational induction, postoperative sedation and pain.

RESULTS

The incidence of emergence delirium was lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the melatonin group (17 versus 37%, relative risk 0.45, 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.88; P  = 0.01). Children in the dexmedetomidine group were more sedated following premedication and in the postanaesthesia care unit ( P  < 0.05). Postoperative pain scores were lower in the dexmedetomidine group than in the melatonin group: 0 [0 to 3] versus 2.5 [0-4], ( P  = 0.01). The requirement for and dose of rescue fentanyl analgesia postoperatively was comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Atomised intranasal dexmedetomidine significantly reduced emergence delirium in paediatric opthalmic procedures under sevoflurane anaesthesia compared to oral melatonin.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials Registry of India CTRI/2021/03/032388 ( www.ctri.nic.in ).

Perioperative Outcomes of Immersive Virtual Reality as Adjunct Anesthesia in Primary Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty

Background

Immersive virtual reality (IVR) is utilized as an adjunct to anesthesia to distract patients from their intraoperative environment, thereby potentially reducing sedative and narcotic medication usage. This study evaluated intraoperative and acute postoperative results of patients undergoing primary total hip (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with and without IVR.

Methods

Utilizing IVR as an adjunct to spinal anesthesia, 18 primary THAs (n = 8) and TKAs (n = 10) were performed. These cases were 1:2 matched based on procedure type, age, sex, and body mass index to those performed without IVR. Intraoperative and postanesthesia care unit sedative/narcotic usage, vital signs, and pain scores were compared. Acute perioperative outcomes, including 24-hour oral morphine equivalent (OME), first ambulation distance, length of stay, and 30-day complications, were also analyzed. Pearson Chi-square and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests evaluated categorical and continuous variables, respectively.

Results

When compared to non-IVR primary THAs and TKAs, those performed with IVR utilized significantly less intraoperative sedation (48 mg vs 708 mg of propofol; P < .001) and trended toward less narcotic usage (13 mcg vs 39 mcg of fentanyl; P = .07). In the postanesthesia care unit, IVR and non-IVR patients showed no significant differences (P > .3) in vital signs, pain scores, or OME received. Additionally, similar (P > .3) postoperative outcomes were noted in both cohorts’ 24-hour OME use, distance at first ambulation, length of stay, and 30-day complications.

Conclusions

The use of spinal anesthesia with the IVR adjunct to perform primary THAs and TKAs appears to be well-tolerated and associated with less intraoperative sedative medication usage than spinal anesthesia alone.

Do palliative care patients and relatives think it would be acceptable to use Bispectral index (BIS) technology to monitor palliative care patients' levels of consciousness? A qualitative exploration with interviews and focus groups for the I-CAN-CARE research programme

BACKGROUND

Bispectral index (BIS) monitoring uses electroencephalographic data as an indicator of patients' consciousness level. This technology might be a useful adjunct to clinical observation when titrating sedative medications for palliative care patients. However, the use of BIS in palliative care generally, and in the UK in particular, is under-researched. A key area is this technology's acceptability for palliative care service users. Ahead of trialling BIS in practice, and in order to ascertain whether such a trial would be reasonable, we conducted a study to explore UK palliative care patients' and relatives' perceptions of the technology, including whether they thought its use in palliative care practice would be acceptable.

METHODS

A qualitative exploration was undertaken. Participants were recruited through a UK hospice. Focus groups and semi-structured interviews were conducted with separate groups of palliative care patients, relatives of current patients, and bereaved relatives. We explored their views on acceptability of using BIS with palliative care patients, and analysed their responses following the five key stages of the Framework method.

RESULTS

We recruited 25 participants. There were ten current hospice patients in three focus groups, four relatives of current patients in one focus group and one individual interview, and eleven bereaved relatives in three focus groups and two individual interviews. Our study participants considered BIS acceptable for monitoring palliative care patients' consciousness levels, and that it might be of use in end-of-life care, provided that it was additional to (rather than a replacement of) usual care, and patients and/or family members were involved in decisions about its use. Participants also noted that BIS, while possibly obtrusive, is not invasive, with some seeing it as equivalent to wearable technological devices such as activity watches.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants considered BIS technology might be of benefit to palliative care as a non-intrusive means of assisting clinical assessment and decision-making at the end of life, and concluded that it would therefore be acceptable to trial the technology with patients.

The effect of alpha-2A adrenergic receptor (ADRA2A) genetic polymorphisms on the depth of sedation of dexmedetomidine: a genetic observational pilot study

Background

The genetic polymorphisms of the alpha-2A adrenergic receptor (ADRA2A), which plays a significant role in sedation, anxiety relief, and antinociception, particularly in dexmedetomidine, may differ in the degree of sedation. This study aimed to investigate the effect of the genetic polymorphisms of ADRA2A (rs11195418, rs1800544, rs2484516, rs1800545, rs553668, rs3750625) on the sedative effects of dexmedetomidine.

Methods

A total of 131 patients aged 50 years or more from May 2018 to August 2019 were included in this study. The ADRA2A gene variants were evaluated using the TaqMan Assay. Dexmedetomidine diluted in normal saline to a concentration of 4 μg.mL^-1 was infused at a dose of 2 μg.kg^-1 to achieve procedural sedation (modified Ramsay sedation scale 4 [mRSS 4]).

Results

A total of 131 patients were evaluated. The genetic polymorphisms (rs11195418) of the ADRA2A receptor gene demonstrated no variation in our participants. The ADRA2A receptor gene polymorphisms (rs1800544, rs2484516, rs1800545, rs553668, and rs3750625) exhibited no differences in total dexmedetomidine doses (p > 0.217), bispectral index at mRSS 4 (p > 0.620), and time to obtain mRSS 4 (p > 0.349).

Conclusion

This study suggested that the genetic polymorphisms of ADRA2A did not affect the sedative efficacy of dexmedetomidine.

A Review of Bispectral Index Utility in Neurocritical Care Patients

Context: Bispectral Index (BIS) was introduced in 1960 to monitor the depth of anesthesia in the operating rooms. It has been recently used to monitor the sedation in the critically ill patients hospitalized in intensive care and neurocritical care units (NCCU). Evidence Acquisition: Patients in the NCCU, particularly those with prolonged mechanical ventilation require appropriate adjustments in the administration of sedative drugs. Similarly, those who require neuro protection with barbiturates need to be closely monitored in the depth of their coma. Results: BIS may be a useful tool in this situation, and it can also help shorten the duration of mechanical ventilation by determining the appropriate time to eliminate patients from mechanical ventilation. We conducted a literature search to evaluate the utility of BIS monitoring in the NCCU patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage, intracranial hemorrhage, coma, cerebral hypoxia, status epilepticus and traumatic brain injury. Conclusions: BIS monitoring may be a useful adjunct to take care of the patients. However, further studies with a larger population and better design are required to substantiate the role of BIS monitoring in the care of NCCU patients.

Anesthesia-induced loss of consciousness disrupts auditory responses beyond primary cortex

Despite its ubiquitous use in medicine, and extensive knowledge of its molecular and cellular effects, how anesthesia induces loss of consciousness (LOC) and affects sensory processing remains poorly understood. Specifically, it is unclear whether anesthesia primarily disrupts thalamocortical relay or intercortical signaling. Here we recorded intracranial electroencephalogram (iEEG), local field potentials (LFPs), and single-unit activity in patients during wakefulness and light anesthesia. Propofol infusion was gradually increased while auditory stimuli were presented and patients responded to a target stimulus until they became unresponsive. We found widespread iEEG responses in association cortices during wakefulness, which were attenuated and restricted to auditory regions upon LOC. Neuronal spiking and LFP responses in primary auditory cortex (PAC) persisted after LOC, while responses in higher-order auditory regions were variable, with neuronal spiking largely attenuated. Gamma power induced by word stimuli increased after LOC while its frequency profile slowed, thus differing from local spiking activity. In summary, anesthesia-induced LOC disrupts auditory processing in association cortices while relatively sparing responses in PAC, opening new avenues for future research into mechanisms of LOC and the design of anesthetic monitoring devices.

Extended Monitoring during Endoscopy

Gastrointestinal endoscopic sedation has improved procedural and patient outcomes but is associated with attendant risks of oversedation and hemodynamic compromise. Therefore, close monitoring during endoscopic procedures using sedation is critical. This monitoring begins with appropriate staff trained in visual assessment of patients and analysis of basic physiologic parameters. It also mandates an array of devices widely used in practice to evaluate hemodynamics, oxygenation, ventilation, and depth of sedation. The authors review the evidence behind monitoring practices and current society recommendations and discuss forthcoming technologies and techniques that are poised to improve noninvasive monitoring of patients under endoscopic sedation.

Depth of anaesthesia monitoring during procedural sedation and analgesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Processed electroencephalogram-based depth of anaesthesia monitoring devices provide an additional method to monitor level of consciousness during procedural sedation and analgesia. The objective of this systematic review was to determine whether using a depth of anaesthesia monitoring device improves the safety and efficacy of sedation.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases (CENTRAL; Medline; CINAHL) were searched up to May 2015.

REVIEW METHODS

Randomised controlled trials that compared use of a depth of anaesthesia monitoring device to a control group who received standard monitoring during procedural sedation and analgesia were included. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment (Cochrane risk of bias tool) were performed by two reviewers. Safety outcomes were hypoxaemia, hypotension and adverse events. Efficacy outcomes were amount of sedation used, duration of sedation recovery and rate of incomplete procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 16 trials (2138 participants) were included. Evidence ratings were downgraded to either low or moderate quality due to study limitations and imprecision. Meta-analysis of 8 trials (766 participants) found no difference in hypoxaemia (RR 0.87; 95% CI=0.67-1.12). No statistically significant difference in hypotension was observed in meta-analysis of 8 trials (RR 0.96; 95% CI=0.54-1.7; 942 participants). Mean dose of propofol was 51mg lower for participants randomised to depth of anaesthesia monitoring (95% CI=-88.7 to -13.3mg) in meta-analysis of results from four trials conducted with 434 participants who underwent interventional endoscopy procedures with propofol infusions to maintain sedation. The difference in recovery time between depth of anaesthesia and standard monitoring groups was not clinically significant (standardised mean difference -0.41; 95% CI=-0.8 to -0.02; I²=86%; 8 trials; 809 participants).

CONCLUSIONS

Depth of anaesthesia monitoring did impact sedation titration during interventional procedures with propofol infusions. For this reason, it seems reasonable for anaesthetists to utilise a depth of anaesthesia monitoring device for select populations of patients if it is decided that limiting the amount of sedation would be beneficial for the individual patient. However, there is no need to invest in purchasing extra equipment or training staff who are not familiar with this technology (e.g. nurses who do not routinely use a depth of anaesthesia monitoring device during general anaesthesia) because there is no high quality evidence suggestive of clear clinical benefits for patient safety or sedation efficacy.

Efficacy Outcome Measures for Procedural Sedation Clinical Trials in Adults: An ACTTION Systematic Review

Successful procedural sedation represents a spectrum of patient- and clinician-related goals. The absence of a gold-standard measure of the efficacy of procedural sedation has led to a variety of outcomes being used in clinical trials, with the consequent lack of consistency among measures, making comparisons among trials and meta-analyses challenging. We evaluated which existing measures have undergone psychometric analysis in a procedural sedation setting and whether the validity of any of these measures support their use across the range of procedures for which sedation is indicated. Numerous measures were found to have been used in clinical research on procedural sedation across a wide range of procedures. However, reliability and validity have been evaluated for only a limited number of sedation scales, observer-rated pain/discomfort scales, and satisfaction measures in only a few categories of procedures. Typically, studies only examined 1 or 2 aspects of scale validity. The results are likely unique to the specific clinical settings they were tested in. Certain scales, for example, those requiring motor stimulation, are unsuitable to evaluate sedation for procedures where movement is prohibited (e.g., magnetic resonance imaging scans). Further work is required to evaluate existing measures for procedures for which they were not developed. Depending on the outcomes of these efforts, it might ultimately be necessary to consider measures of sedation efficacy to be procedure specific.

A review of sedation scales for the cardiac catheterization laboratory

PURPOSE

Sedation scales have the potential to facilitate effective procedural sedation and analgesia in the cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL). For this potential to become realized, a scale that is suitable for use in the CCL either needs to be identified or developed.

DESIGN

A structured review strategy was applied.

METHODS

To identify sedation scales, a review of Medline and CINHAL was conducted.

FINDINGS

One sedation scale for the CCL, the North American Society for Pacing and Electrophysiology Sedation Scale, and 15 intensive care unit (ICU) scales met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Analysis of the scale's item structures and psychometric properties was then performed.

CONCLUSION

None of these scales were deemed suitable for use in the CCL. As such, further research is required to develop a new scale. The new scale should consist of more than one item to make it more effective for tracking the patient's response to medications. Specific tests required to conduct a rigorous evaluation of the new scale's psychometric properties are outlined in this article.

Prediction of Nociceptive Responses during Sedation by Linear and Non-Linear Measures of EEG Signals in High Frequencies

The level of sedation in patients undergoing medical procedures evolves continuously, affected by the interaction between the effect of the anesthetic and analgesic agents and the pain stimuli. The monitors of depth of anesthesia, based on the analysis of the electroencephalogram (EEG), have been progressively introduced into the daily practice to provide additional information about the state of the patient. However, the quantification of analgesia still remains an open problem. The purpose of this work is to improve the prediction of nociceptive responses with linear and non-linear measures calculated from EEG signal filtered in frequency bands higher than the traditional bands. Power spectral density and auto-mutual information function was applied in order to predict the presence or absence of the nociceptive responses to different stimuli during sedation in endoscopy procedure. The proposed measures exhibit better performances than the bispectral index (BIS). Values of prediction probability of Pk above 0.75 and percentages of sensitivity and specificity above 70% were achieved combining EEG measures from the traditional frequency bands and higher frequency bands.

A prospective evaluation of the incidence of adverse events in nurse-administered moderate sedation guided by sedation scores or Bispectral Index

BACKGROUND

Moderate sedation is routinely performed in patients undergoing minor therapeutic and diagnostic procedures outside the operating room. The level of sedation is often monitored by sedation nurses using clinical criteria, such as sedation scores. The Bispectral Index (BIS) is derived from changes in the electroencephalograph profile that may provide an objective measure of the level of sedation. In this prospective observational study, we investigated whether using BIS values to guide sedative drug administration influences the level of sedation and the incidence of adverse events compared with using Ramsay sedation scale (RSS) only in nurse-administered moderate sedation. We hypothesized that both depth of sedation and the incidence of adverse events related to oversedation would decrease when sedation nurses used BIS values to help guide sedative drug administration.

METHODS

Sedation care was provided by trained sedation nurses under the supervision of a physician performing the procedure. The sedation regimen was initiated with IV midazolam 1 to 2 mg and fentanyl 50 mcg or hydromorphone 0.2 mg. Additional small boluses of midazolam, fentanyl, or hydromorphone were administered to maintain an RSS of 2 to 3 (cooperative, oriented, and responding to verbal command). Propofol was not used. Information including patient demographics, type of procedure, medication administered, RSS, and rates of adverse events was recorded by the sedation nurses for each patient on a computer-readable form. The study was divided into 3 phases. In phase 1 (baseline, 6 months' duration), baseline data on sedation practice were prospectively collected. There was no change from standard of care for all patients except that each patient had a BIS sensor attached, but the monitor was covered and nurses were blinded to the BIS values. In phase 2 (training, 3 months), the sedation nurses received comprehensive education on the use of BIS to guide sedative drug administration, pharmacology of commonly used drugs, and methods for rescue from oversedation. The recommended BIS range for moderate sedation was 75 to 90. Adequate training of all sedation nurses on the use of BIS was documented. In phase 3 (implementation, 6 months), the BIS values were used to guide drug administration.

RESULTS

Data were available on 1766 patients (999 and 767 patients in phases 1 and 3, respectively). Most of the procedures were colonoscopies, upper gastrointestinal endoscopies, examinations under anesthesia, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and central venous access catheter placements. No differences in the demographics between the 2 groups were observed. The RSS was inversely associated with the BIS value, r = -0.16 (95% confidence interval, -0.19 to -0.12; P < 0.00001). An RSS of 2 to 3 was maintained in 94% of patients in phase 1 and 96% of patients in phase 3 The mean (±SD) BIS values were 80.9 ± 6.8 in phase 1 and 80.4 ± 6.5 in phase 3. The number of sedation-related adverse events was lower in our sample when BIS was used, with an odds ratio of 0.41 (95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.62; P < 0.0001), and patients with restlessness had a lower BIS value than those without this symptom (P < 0.0001). No serious adverse events or deaths were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurse-administered moderate sedation using midazolam and fentanyl was usually associated with appropriate levels of sedation as assessed by both the RSS and BIS with an overall low incidence of adverse events. The use of BIS did not change the mean level of sedation significantly, although the number of sedation-related adverse events appears to be lower when BIS was used.

The validity, reliability, responsiveness and applicability of observation sedation-scoring instruments for use with adult patients in the emergency department: a systematic literature review

AIM

This paper reports a systematic literature review examining the range of published observational sedation-scoring instruments available in the assessment, monitoring and titration of continuous intravenous sedation to critically ill adult patients in the Emergency Department, and the extent to which validity, reliability, responsiveness and applicability of the instruments has been addressed.

BACKGROUND

Emergency nurses are increasingly responsible for the ongoing assessment, monitoring and titration of continuous intravenous sedation, in addition to analgesia for the critically ill adult patient. One method to optimise patient sedation is to use a validated observational sedation-scoring tool. It is not clear however what the optimal instrument available is for use in this clinical context.

METHODS

A systematic literature review methodology was employed. A range of electronic databases were searched for the period 1946-2013. Search terms incorporated "sedation scale", "sedation scoring system", "measuring sedation", and "sedation tool" and were used to retrieve relevant literature. In addition, manual searches were conducted and articles retrieved from those listed in key papers. Articles were assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) making sense of evidence tools.

RESULTS

A total of 27 observational sedation-scoring instruments were identified. Sedation-scoring instruments can be categorised as linear or composite, the former being the most common. A wide variety of patient behaviours are used within the instruments to measure depth and quality of patient sedation. Typically sedation-scoring instruments incorporated three patient behaviours, which were then rated to generate a numerical score. The majority of the instruments have been subjected to validity and reliability testing, however few have been examined for responsiveness or applicability.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the 27 observational sedation-scoring instruments were designed or trialled within ED. The Richmond Agitation and Assessment Scale was identified as most suitable to be trialled prospectively within an Australian ED.

A comparison of ketamine-midazolam and ketamine-propofol combinations used for sedation in the endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration: a prospective, single-blind, randomized study

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of ketamine-midazolam and ketamine-propofol combinations for procedural sedation in endobronchial ultrasound guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA).

METHODS

Sixty patients who were undergoing EBUS-TBNA were included in this study. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group 1 was given 0.25 mg/kg intravenous (iv) ketamine, 2 min later than 0.05 mg/kg iv midazolam. Group 2 received 0.125 mg/kg ketamine-propofol mixture (ketofol), 2 min subsequent to injection of 0.25 mg/kg each. Sedation was maintained with additional doses of ketamine 0.25 mg/kg, and ketofol 0.125 mg/kg each in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively. Blood pressure, heart rate (HR), peripheral oxygen saturation, respiratory rate (RR), Ramsay Sedation Score (RSS), and severity of cough were recorded prior to and after administration of sedation agent in the beginning of fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB) and every 5 min of the procedure. The consumption of the agents, the satisfactions of the bronchoscopist and the patients, and the recovery time were also recorded.

RESULTS

HR in the 10(th) min and RSS value in the 35(th) min of induction in Group 1 were higher than the other group (P<0.05). The recovery time in Group 1 was statistically longer than Group 2 (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between groups with respect to other parameters (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

It was concluded that both ketamine-midazolam and ketamine-propofol combinations for sedation during EBUS-TBNA were similarly effective and safe without remarkable side effects.

Middle latency auditory-evoked potential index for predicting the degree of consciousness of comatose patients in EDs

INTRODUCTION

Digitized assessment of the degree of consciousness is a universal challenge in emergency departments (EDs) and intensive care units (ICUs). The middle latency auditory-evoked potential index (MLAEPi) monitor aepEX plus (Audiomex, Glasgow, Scotland, UK) is the first mobile middle latency auditory-evoked potential monitor. We speculated that the initial MLAEPi determined on arrival at EDs could indicate cerebral function and predict the degree of consciousness of comatose patients.

METHODS

We used MLAEPi-related data from 50 comatose patients with disturbance of consciousness (DOC), 50 patients with cardiopulmonary arrest (CPA), and 50 healthy volunteers (control). Comatose patients were defined as those with an initial Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or less. The CPA group consisted of patients who arrived at EDs without restoration of spontaneous circulation. Among the patients with DOC who underwent sedation at EDs, the change in the MLAEPi was evaluated between arrival at the ED and ICU admission.

RESULTS

The initial MLAEPi was significantly lower in the DOC group than in the control group but significantly higher in the DOC group than in the CPA group. Among the comatose patients, the receiver operating characteristic curve for the initial MLAEPi showed an area under the curve of 0.93 (P < .01) for the DOC group. Thirty patients with DOC underwent sedation at EDs, and the initial MLAEPi was significantly higher than those at other periods during emergency care.

CONCLUSION

The MLAEPi (simple numerical value) may be used to evaluate the degree of consciousness in comatose patients while performing emergency care in EDs.

A comparative study to evaluate the effect of intranasal dexmedetomidine versus oral alprazolam as a premedication agent in morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery

Background:

Morbidly obese patients with obstructive sleep apnea are extremely sensitive to sedative premedication. Intranasal dexmedetomidine is painless and quick acting. Intranasal dexmedetomidine can be used for premedication as it produces adequate sedation and also obtund hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation.

Materials and Methods:

Forty morbidly obese patients with BMI > 35 were chosen and divided into two groups. Group DEX received intranasal dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg (ideal body weight) while other group (AZ) received oral alprazolam 0.5 mg. Sedation scale, heart rate and the mean arterial pressure was assessed in both the groups at 0 hour, 45 minutes, during laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation.

Results:

The demographic profile, baseline heart rate, means arterial pressure, oxygen saturation and sedation scale was comparable between the two groups. The sedation scores, after 45 min, were statistically significant between the two groups i.e., 2.40 ± 1.09 in the AZ group as compared to 3.20 ± 1.79 in DEX group P value 0.034. The heart rate, mean arterial pressure and oxygen saturation were statistically similar between the two groups, after 45 min. The heart rate was significantly lower in the DEX group as compared to the AZ group. There was no statistical difference in the mean arterial pressure between the two groups either during laryngoscopy or tracheal intubation.

Conclusion:

Intranasal dexmedetomidine is a better premedication agent in morbidly obese patients than oral alprazolam.

Procedural sedation: A review of sedative agents, monitoring, and management of complications

Given the continued increase in the complexity of invasive and noninvasive procedures, healthcare practitioners are faced with a larger number of patients requiring procedural sedation. Effective sedation and analgesia during procedures not only provides relief of suffering, but also frequently facilitates the successful and timely completion of the procedure. However, any of the agents used for sedation and/or analgesia may result in adverse effects. These adverse effects most often affect upper airway patency, ventilatory function or the cardiovascular system. This manuscript reviews the pharmacology of the most commonly used agents for sedation and outlines their primary effects on respiratory and cardiovascular function. Suggested guidelines for the avoidance of adverse effects through appropriate pre-sedation evaluation, early identification of changes in respiratory and cardiovascular function, and their treatment are outlined.

Nurse perception of Bispectral Index monitoring as an adjunct to sedation scale assessment in the critically ill paediatric patient

BACKGROUND

Reliability of clinical scales and haemodynamic variables for assessing sedation depth in critically children is limited, particularly for those receiving neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs).

OBJECTIVE

To introduce and integrate the use of Bispectral Index (BIS) monitoring as adjunct to sedation scale assessment in intubated mechanically ventilated Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) patients.

METHODS

Quality improvement intervention including: BIS education for all PICU nurses; 8-week implementation of BIS monitoring guided by Paediatric BIS Sedation Protocol; evaluation by convenience sample of nurses (n=17).

MEASUREMENTS

15-Item survey assessing perceptions of BIS attributes was given to nurses after first 4 BIS encounters; nurse comments and project coordinator observations were recorded.

FINDINGS

Survey data (intermediate reliability and nurse attitude ratings and low ratings on other attributes; little change over time) revealed nurses' reservations about the usefulness of BIS as an adjunct to sedation scales, but qualitative data indicated that they valued BIS for assessing sedation depth in children receiving NMBAs.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-intervention, BIS monitoring was adopted in PICU for children receiving NMBAs. One year later, this practice is sustained, and the percentage of BIS-monitored patients has increased. Guidelines addressing the use of BIS in patients not receiving paralytics are needed.

Ketamine-propofol combination (ketofol) versus propofol alone for emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia: a randomized double-blind trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We determine whether a 1:1 mixture of ketamine and propofol (ketofol) for emergency department (ED) procedural sedation results in a 13% or more absolute reduction in adverse respiratory events compared with propofol alone.

METHODS

Participants were randomized to receive either ketofol or propofol in a double-blind fashion. Inclusion criteria were aged 14 years or older and American Society of Anesthesiology class 1 to 3 status. The primary outcome was the number and proportion of patients experiencing an adverse respiratory event as defined by the Quebec Criteria. Secondary outcomes were sedation consistency, efficacy, and time; induction time; and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 284 patients were enrolled, 142 per group. Forty-three (30%) patients experienced an adverse respiratory event in the ketofol group compared with 46 (32%) in the propofol group (difference 2%; 95% confidence interval -9% to 13%; P=.80). Three ketofol patients and 1 propofol patient received bag-valve-mask ventilation. Sixty-five (46%) patients receiving ketofol and 93 (65%) patients receiving propofol required repeated medication dosing or progressed to a Ramsay Sedation Score of 4 or less during their procedure (difference 19%; 95% confidence interval 8% to 31%; P=.001). Six patients receiving ketofol were treated for recovery agitation. Other secondary outcomes were similar between the groups. Patients and staff were highly satisfied with both agents.

CONCLUSION

Ketofol for ED procedural sedation does not result in a reduced incidence of adverse respiratory events compared with propofol alone. Induction time, efficacy, and sedation time were similar; however, sedation depth appeared to be more consistent with ketofol.

Pediatric procedural sedation and analgesia

Procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) is an evolving field in pediatric emergency medicine. As new drugs breach the boundaries of anesthesia in the Pediatric Emergency Department, parents, patients, and physicians are finding new and more satisfactory methods of sedation. Short acting, rapid onset agents with little or no lingering effects and improved safety profiles are replacing archaic regimens. This article discusses the warning signs and areas of a patient's medical history that are particularly pertinent to procedural sedation and the drugs used. The necessary equipment is detailed to provide the groundwork for implementing safe sedation in children. It is important for practitioners to familiarize themselves with a select few of the PSA drugs, rather than the entire list of sedatives. Those agents most relevant to PSA in the pediatric emergency department are presented.

Procedural sedation and analgesia research

The study of procedural sedation and analgesia has experienced significant development recently. As specific procedural sedation and analgesia agents have been developed and introduced into clinical practice, safety and efficacy studies have been conducted. The principle difficulty in conducting these studies has been the relatively low frequency of traditional outcome measures. As procedural sedation and analgesia research has expanded, measurement techniques have been refined to allow for precise comparisons between smaller groups of subjects to improve the capacity to compare these procedures. We have used capnography, bispectral EEG analysis, and subject perceptions of pain and recall as surrogate predictors of adverse events in order to compare agents and procedural techniques in procedural sedation and analgesia.

[Procedural analgesia : concepts and practice]

The effect of severe pain and its hazardous stress-related cardiocirculatory consequences have been well documented for the perisurgical setting. Independently of surgical intervention however, even short and simple measures (e.g. thorax drain removal, repositioning a limb fracture) and longer diagnostic procedures such as MRI are potentially very painful or stressful to the patient. Though longer diagnostic procedures are frequently supported by systemic medication, short interventions regularly lack this aspect. Specific challenges result from the need to counteract sometimes great changes in pain intensity. Moreover procedural analgesia represents a multidisciplinary measure not restricted to anaesthesiology, as most of these measures are performed without anaesthesia. To avoid endangering the patient, the choice of drugs and patient monitoring have to meet certain professional and technical standards. Competence in respiratory management is of paramount importance. This paper outlines these requirements and serves as an orientation outside the anaesthesiological speciality.

Perspectives on sedation assessment in critical care

Multiple studies have been undertaken to show that neurofunction monitors can correlate to objective sedation assessments. Showing a correlation between these 2 patient assessments tools may not be the correct approach for validation of neurofunction monitors. Two different methods of assessing 2 different modes of the patient's response to sedation should not be expected to precisely correlate unless the desire is to replace one method with the other. We provide a brief summary of several sedation scales, physiologic measures and neurofunction monitoring tools, and correlations literature for bispectral index monitoring, and the Ramsay Scale and the Sedation Agitation Scale. Neurofunction monitors provide near continuous information about a different domain of the sedation response than intermittent observational assessments. Further research should focus on contributions from this technology to the improvement of patient outcomes when neurofunction monitoring is used as a complement, not a replacement, for observational methods of sedation assessment.

An assessment of the association of bispectral index with 2 clinical sedation scales for monitoring depth of procedural sedation

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a study to assess the correlation of bispectral index (BIS) to 2 clinical sedation scales.

METHODS

This was a prospective, observational study. The BIS number was recorded at baseline and every 30 seconds. One investigator separately monitored the patients for depth of sedation using the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation and the Continuum of Depth of Sedation scales.

RESULTS

During the 6-month period, 75 patients were enrolled. The Spearman correlation between the BIS and the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation was 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.74). The Spearman correlation between the BIS and the Continuum of Depth of Sedation was 0.53 (95% CI, 0.36-0.70). The mean minimum BIS for patients without a complication was 70 (SD, 15.9) compared with 68 (SD, 12.9) for patients with a complication (difference = 2; 95% CI, -7-11).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated moderate correlation between BIS and the 2 clinical sedation scales. The correlation is not strong enough to be used reliably in a clinical setting. The mean minimum BIS scores were not significantly different for those with sedation complications vs those without complications.

Prevention of awakening signs after rapid-sequence intubation: a randomized study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to establish the incidence of signs of inadequate sedation after rapid-sequence intubation (RSI) and to determine whether a supplementary bolus of induction agent decreases these signs.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind trial design was used. Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 treatments: RSI plus etomidate bolus followed by continuous sedative infusion (ETO group) or RSI plus placebo followed by continuous sedative infusion (placebo group). The primary outcome measure was a composite sedation score measured 6 minutes after induction. The components of the score were the Ramsay sedation score, the presence of cough or pulling at endotracheal (ET) tube, jaw relaxation, motor activity, and eye opening. The total score (0-10) was the sum of the 5 components.

RESULTS

There were 21 patients in the ETO group and 20 patients in the placebo group. The percentage of patients presenting with at least 1 sign of awareness was 43% in the ETO group and 65% in the placebo group (P = .16) 6 minutes after induction. The sedation score was significantly higher at 6 minutes in the placebo group compared with the ETO group (2.4 +/- 2.9 vs 0.9 +/- 1.4; P < .05). The use of additional sedative drugs during the observation period was 43% (9/21) in the ETO group compared with 55% (11/20) in the placebo group (P = .44).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that some patients have signs of inadequate sedation after RSI. These signs may be partially prevented by a supplementary dose of an induction agent but other supplementary sedation seems necessary.

Recall after procedural sedation in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Procedural sedation (PS) is common in the emergency department (ED) and ideally patients should have no recall of the procedure.

AIM

To determine the incidence of recall.

METHODS

A prospective observational study in an university ED of all patients undergoing PS. Data were collected on a pre-formatted data sheet. Levels of satisfaction with the sedation by the treating physician and nurse were recorded on a 10 cm visual analogue scale. On recovery, the patient was asked a validated questionnaire to determine the rate of immediate recall and at telephone follow-up for delayed recall.

RESULTS

125 patients (88 male, 70%) were enrolled and 110 had completed follow-up. Mean (range) age was 51.6 (13-91) years. Procedures included 84 (67%) orthopaedic reductions and 41 (33%) cardioversions. A wide range of drug combinations were used, including fentanyl/propofol 32 (25.6%), fentanyl/midazolam 30 (24%), fentanyl/midazolam/propofol 16 (12.8%), propofol 13 (10.4%). 87.2% of procedures were successful. A grimace/groan was observed in 61 of 125 (49%). Immediate recall occurred in 9 of 121 (7.4%; 95% CI 3.7 to 14.0) and delayed recall in 5 of 110 (4.5%; 95% CI 1.7 to 10.8). No drug combination was correlated with recall (Spearman's rho = 0.149), nor the presence of a grimace/groan (r = -0.039). Median sedation satisfaction scores were physician 9.0, nurse 10, patient 10. Correlation of delayed recall with patient satisfaction was -0.471 (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Recall following PS in ED is uncommon. There is no association of recall with drugs used or the presence of a grimace/groan. There is high patient satisfaction with PS in the ED.

Level of sedation evaluation with Cerebral State Index and A-Line Arx in children undergoing diagnostic procedures

BACKGROUND

Monitoring of anesthesia depth is difficult clinically, particularly in children. The aim of this study was to assess the correlation existing between CSI (Cerebral State Index), or AAI (A-line ARX) and a clinical sedation scale such as UMSS (University of Michigan Sedation Scale), during deep sedation with propofol in children undergoing diagnostic procedures.

METHODS

Twenty ASA I and II children, scheduled to undergo deep sedation for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGDS), were enrolled. The patients were randomly assigned to receive depth of anesthesia monitoring with CSI or AAI. The anesthetist administered repeated doses of propofol every 10 s to a UMSS score of 3-4. An attending anesthetist, not involved in drug administration, recorded time and doses of sedation medications, vital signs, UMSS score and CSI or AAI score. All the evaluations were recorded at awake state (baseline), every 10 s until an UMSS score of 3-4 and every 3 min until the children were awake.

RESULTS

We enrolled 13 males and seven females ranging in age from 8 months to 7 years. After induction of anesthesia CSI and AAI scores decreased and from the end of the procedure to emergence the two scores increased. The CSI data showed a strong correlation with the UMSS scores (r = -0.861; P < 0.0001); we found a similar correlation between the AAI data and the UMSS scores (r = -0.823; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that CSI and AAI may be two, real-time and objective tools to assess induction and emergence during propofol sedation in children undergoing EGDS and MRI.

Procedural sedation and analgesia research: state of the art

The authors review the current state of procedural sedation and analgesia research and clinical practice in adults and children, discuss the limitations in research methodology, and propose future areas of investigation.

Capnography and Depth of Sedation During Propofol Sedation in Children

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relationship between continuous capnography and observed airway and respiratory adverse effects and the depth of sedation when using propofol for pediatric orthopedic procedures.

METHODS

We administered propofol after opioid premedication in a prospective convenience sample of children undergoing orthopedic reduction in our emergency department (ED). All children received supplemental oxygen (1 L/minute by nasal cannula) and continuous capnography and had depth of sedation assessed every 2 minutes. Adverse airway or respiratory events and any associated interventions were recorded.

RESULTS

Adverse airway or respiratory events with intervention occurred in 14 of the 125 enrolled children (11%; 95% confidence interval 4.0% to 14%): jaw thrust in 4, supplemental oxygen in 6, and bag-valve-mask ventilation in 4. All interventions required were brief (<30 seconds). Capnography detected apnea before clinical examination or pulse oximetry in all 5 occurrences and similarly first detected airway obstruction in 6 of the 10 occurrences. The median maximal modified Ramsay score was 6 (range 3 to 8), ie, deep sedation.

CONCLUSION

When propofol is administered for ED deep sedation to facilitate pediatric orthopedic reduction, continuous capnography detects most airway and respiratory events leading to intervention before clinical examination or pulse oximetry.

Procedural sedation and analgesia in children

Procedural sedation and analgesia for children--the use of sedative, analgesic, or dissociative drugs to relieve anxiety and pain associated with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures--is now widely practised by a diverse group of specialists outside the operating theatre. We review the principles underlying safe and effective procedural sedation and analgesia and the spectrum of procedures for which it is currently done. We discuss the decision-making process used to determine appropriate drug selection, dosing, and sedation endpoint. We detail the pharmacopoeia for procedural sedation and analgesia, reviewing the pharmacology and adverse effects of these drugs. International differences in practice are described along with current areas of controversy and future directions.

Intranasal fentanyl is an equivalent analgesic to oral morphine in paediatric burns patients for dressing changes: a randomised double blind crossover study

INTRODUCTION

The ideal analgesic agent for burns wound dressings in paediatric patients would be one that is easy to administer, well tolerated, and produces rapid onset of analgesia with a short duration of action and minimal side-effects to allow rapid resumption of activities and oral intake. We compared our current treatment of oral morphine to intranasal fentanyl in an attempt to find an agent closer to the ideal.

METHODS

A randomised double blind two-treatment crossover study comparing intranasal administration of fentanyl (INF) to orally administered morphine (OM). Children with burn injury aged up to 15 years and weighing 10-75 kg were included. Primary end-point was pain scores. Secondary end-points were time to resumption of age-appropriate activities, time to resumption of fluid intake, sedation and cooperation. Routine observations and vital signs were also recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients were studied with a median age of 4.5 years (interquartile range 1.8-9.0 years) and a median weight of 18.4 kg (interquartile range 12.9-33.2kg). Mean pain difference scores (OM-INF) ranged from -0.500 (95% CI=-1.653 to 0.653) at baseline to -0.625 (05% CI=-1.863 to 0.613) for a retrospective rating of worst pain experienced during the dressing procedure. All measurements were within a pre-defined range of equivalent efficacy. The median time to resumption of fluid intake was 108 min (range 44-175 min) with OM and 140 min (range 60-210 min) with INF. These differences were not statistically significant. Fewer patients experienced mild side-effects with INF compared to OM (n=5 versus n=10). No patients experienced depressed respirations or oxygen saturations.

SUMMARY

Intranasal fentanyl was shown to be equivalent to oral morphine in the provision of analgesia for burn wound dressing changes in this cohort of paediatric patients. It was concluded that intranasal fentanyl is a suitable analgesic agent for use in paediatric burns dressing changes either by itself or in combination with oral morphine as a top up titratable agent.

Novel monitoring techniques for use with procedural sedation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A variety of pharmacologic agents used for procedural sedation in children to reduce pain and anxiety may produce respiratory depression and hypotension. Although standard monitoring guidelines include oxygen saturation, this measurement is limited as a guide to respiratory function. This review discusses two new monitoring techniques recently introduced to the pediatric emergency department that facilitate procedural sedation and reduce potential adverse effects of the medications administered.

RECENT FINDINGS

Capnography via an end-tidal carbon dioxide monitor measures carbon dioxide concentrations during ventilation. This measurement is independent of oxygen saturation and thereby aids the clinician in identifying hypoventilation and apnea in the sedated patient at an earlier stage than conventional monitoring. The bispectral index monitor objectively measures the depth of sedation by analyzing electroencephalogram signals from a cutaneous probe. This tool enables the physician to titrate sedative medications to a desired effect and thereby reduce the risks associated with oversedation.

SUMMARY

Studies have illustrated the use of both devices as adjuncts to current standard monitoring of children in the outpatient setting. These modalities will facilitate the efficacy of procedural sedation in children and improve safety by enabling early recognition of hypoventilation and by reducing the risk of oversedation in children undergoing procedural sedation.

Procedural Sedation and Analgesia: A Review and New Concepts

Procedural sedation and analgesia has become a commonplace procedure in the ED, certainly falling under the domain of the EP. Every EP should approach PSA as a complex procedure requiring high-level skills and knowledge. Initially, understand that PSA represents a spectrum of goals, from anxiolysis and pain relief to deep sedation. Assess the needs of the patient and the concomitant procedure and set goals accordingly. There is a pharmacopia of drugs that provide sedation and analgesia. Become familiar with their pharmacology, advantages and disadvantages, and indications. This will allow for appropriate usage and achievement of sedation goals. Several drugs that are commonly used for general anesthesia are proving themselves to be safe and efficacious for PSA. Both etomidate and propofol have emerged as useful drugs for PSA. Continued research and practice with these agents will add to our understanding and help define their use for PSA. Performing PSA as a procedure itself requires preparedness, diligent monitoring, and risk awareness. Knowing the patient's comorbid state and choosing agents that will not exacerbate their baseline status minimize risk. Following fasting guidelines is appropriate in certain clinical situations, and is prudent when time permits. However, these guidelines are a benchmark for minimizing risk and are not supported by evidence-based medicine. It is important to be cognizant of the guidelines but also to identify the emergency scenario where action must be taken despite the fasting guidelines. Controlling sedation depth also minimizes the risk of aspiration and other complications. The ETCO2 monitor and Bispectral Index may prove to be useful adjuncts for monitoring sedation depth. However, there is nothing yet that measures sedation depth quantitatively that can replace the qualitative assessment of the EP. More and more PSA is falling under the domain of the EP. It is important for the EP to be involved in hospital policy and guidelines associated with this procedure, and to remain aware of new research in this field. EPs can thereby contribute to quality assurance throughout the medical community by setting a standard in the practice of PSA, as they are not the only practitioners using this procedure. With continued practice and research, expertise in this field will grow measurably.

Bispectral analysis during deep sedation of pediatric oral surgery patients

PURPOSE

Bispectral (BIS) analysis uses electroencephalogram information from a forehead electrode to calculate an index score (0 to 100; 0 = coma; 90 to 100 = awake). This index score correlates with the level of alertness in anesthetized patients. Classically, sedation has been monitored with clinical sedation scales such as the Observers Assessment of Alertness Sedation Scale (OAA/S), Modified Ramsey Scale, or a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Our objective was to determine the correlation between clinical sedation scales and BIS index in pediatric patients undergoing sedation in an outpatient oral surgery setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective cohort study of patients aged 2 to 17 years undergoing sedation in an outpatient oral surgery office. Sedation was performed in the customary manner with the addition of BIS monitoring. Three clinical sedation scores (OAA/S: 5 to 1; 5 = awake, 1 = unresponsive; Modified Ramsey: 1 to 6; 1-2 = awake, 6 = unresponsive; VAS: 0 to 10; 0 = awake, 10 = unresponsive) were assigned every 5 minutes by an investigator blinded to the BIS index. Data were analyzed using a repeated measures linear regression model.

RESULTS

Sixteen subjects undergoing oral surgery, ages 4.5 years to 17 years, were enrolled, mean age 12.6 years +/- 4.3 years (standard deviation). Patients received methohexital in addition to 1 or more of the following: nitrous oxide, fentanyl, or midazolam. The results of the longitudinal regression analysis showed a highly significant association between the sedation scales and the BIS index.

CONCLUSION

The BIS monitor may be a useful adjunct in monitoring pediatric patients receiving sedation in the outpatient setting.

Bispectral analysis during pediatric procedural sedation

OBJECTIVE

Bispectral analysis (BIS) is a technology using EEG information from a forehead electrode to calculate an index (0-100; 0 = coma, 90-100 = awake). Our objective was to determine the degree of agreement between sedation scales and BIS values in pediatric patients undergoing sedation.

METHODS

Patients ages 2 to 17 years, undergoing procedural sedation, were enrolled. Sedation was performed in the customary manner with the addition of BIS monitoring and assessment of a clinical sedation scale: the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S), every 5 minutes during the sedation procedure. Clinical scales were performed by an investigator blinded to the BIS index. The association between a clinical scale and BIS scores was analyzed using longitudinal regression analysis.

RESULTS

We enrolled 47 subjects; 55% were sedated with ketamine and midazolam and the remaining 45% received methohexital, propofol or midazolam and a narcotic. The results of the regression analysis demonstrated a highly significant association between the OAA/S score and BIS value (beta = 5.0, 95% CI 4.3 to 5.7, P < 0.0001). Patients were divided into 2 groups, those sedated with ketamine and those sedated with nonketamine medications. The association between OAA/S score and BIS value was not statistically significant for the ketamine population (beta = 0.809, 95% CI -0.1 to 1.7, P = 0.09), but remained significant for the nonketamine subjects (beta = 8.6, 95% CI 7.7 to 9.4, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The OAA/S sedation scale predicts the BIS value for pediatric patients undergoing procedural sedation when sedated with certain medications, excluding ketamine.