Evaluating Patient-Centered Outcomes in Clinical Trials of Procedural Sedation, Part 2 Safety: Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research Recommendations

Procedural sedation competencies: a review and multidisciplinary international consensus statement on knowledge, skills, training, and credentialing

Procedural sedation is practised by a heterogeneous group of practitioners working in a wide array of settings. However, there are currently no accepted standards for the competencies a sedation practitioner should have, the content of sedation training programmes, and guidelines for credentialing. The multidisciplinary International Committee for the Advancement of Procedural Sedation sought to develop a consensus statement on the following: which competencies should medical or dental practitioners have for procedural sedation and how are they obtained, assessed, maintained, and privileged. Using the framework of Competency-Based Medical Education, the practice of procedural sedation was defined as a complex professional task requiring demonstrable integration of different competencies. For each question, the results of a literature review were synthetised into preliminary statements. Following an iterative Delphi review method, final consensus was reached. Using multispeciality consensus, we defined procedural sedation competence by identifying a set of core competencies in the domains of knowledge, skills, and attitudes across physical safety, effectiveness, psychological safety, and deliberate practice. In addition, we present a standardised framework for competency-based training and credentialing of procedural sedation practitioners.

Hypotensive Events in Pediatric Patients Receiving Dexmedetomidine for MRI

PURPOSE

Dexmedetomidine, the preferred pediatric sedating agent for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), has the side effect of hypotension. Newer recommendations for reporting adverse events in pediatric procedural sedation include using a two-pronged definition. Our aim was to describe the incidence of hypotension in patients undergoing sedated MRI and to identify demographic and clinical factors associated with hypotension, applying a two-pronged definition, where a numerical threshold/clinical criterion must be met as well as at least one clinical intervention performed.

DESIGN

An observational cohort study.

METHODS

Medical record data were extracted for outpatients less than 18 years of age sedated primarily with dexmedetomidine for MRI in a single center for over a seven-year period. Patients who received propofol as an adjunct were also included. Hypotension was defined using a two-pronged approach, as a 20% reduction in systolic blood pressure from baseline lasting ≥10 minutes, coupled with a fluid bolus. Analysis included descriptive statistics, t tests and logistic regression using discrete-time survival analysis.

FINDINGS

Of the 1,590 patient encounters, 90 (5.7%) experienced hypotension. Males were significantly more likely to have hypotension. Patients with hypotension had overall longer appointment times, including longer sedation times and recovery time. Greater blood pressure (BP) variability in the preceding 20 minutes also increased the risk of hypotension.

CONCLUSIONS

Our lower incidence of hypotension is likely related to the two-pronged intervention-based definition used, as it likely more accurately reflects clinically meaningful hypotension. To our knowledge, this is the first study using this approach with this population. Research further examining the relationship between prolonged sedation, blood pressure variability, gender, hypotension, and recovery time is needed. Understanding these relationships will help interdisciplinary teams, including nurses in pediatric procedural areas, to reduce the incidence of hypotension, potentially maximize patient safety, and optimize throughput.

Integrated pulmonary index during procedural sedation and analgesia: A cluster-randomized trial

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of utilizing the integrated pulmonary index for capnography implementation during sedation administered by nurses.

DESIGN

Cluster-randomized trial.

METHODS

Participants were enrolled from the interventional radiology department at an academic hospital in Canada. Nurses were randomized to either enable or disable the Integrated Pulmonary Index feature of the capnography monitor. Procedures were observed by a research assistant to collect information about alarm performance characteristics. The primary outcome was the number of seconds in an alert condition state without an intervention being applied.

RESULTS

The number of seconds in an alarm state without intervention was higher in the group that enabled the integrated pulmonary index compared to the group that disabled this feature, but this difference did not reach statistical significance. Likewise, the difference between groups for the total alarm duration, total number of alarms and the total number of appropriate alarms was not statistically significant. The number of inappropriate alarms was higher in the group that enabled the Integrated Pulmonary Index, but this estimate was highly imprecise. There was no difference in the odds of an adverse event (measured by the Tracking and Reporting Outcomes of Procedural Sedation tool) occurring between groups. Desaturation events were uncommon and brief in both groups but the area under the SpO2 90% desaturation curve scores were lower for the group that enabled the integrated pulmonary index.

CONCLUSION

Enabling the integrated pulmonary index during nurse-administered procedural sedation did not reduce nurses' response times to alarms. Therefore, integrating multiple physiological parameters related to respiratory assessment into a single index did not lower the threshold for intervention by nurses.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

The time it takes to respond to capnography monitor alarms will not be reduced if the integrated pulmonary Iindex feature of capnography monitors is enabled during nurse-administered procedural sedation.

IMPACT

Results do not support the routine enabling of the integrated pulmonary index when nurses use capnography to monitor patients during procedural sedation as a strategy to reduce the time it takes to initiate responses to alarms.

REPORTING METHOD

CONSORT.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

There was no patient or public contribution.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT05068700).

Sedation Research in Critically Ill Pediatric Patients: Proposals for Future Study Design From the Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research IV Workshop

OBJECTIVES

Sedation and analgesia for infants and children requiring mechanical ventilation in the PICU is uniquely challenging due to the wide spectrum of ages, developmental stages, and pathophysiological processes encountered. Studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of sedative and analgesic management in pediatric patients have used heterogeneous methodologies. The Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research (SCEPTER) IV hosted a series of multidisciplinary meetings to establish consensus statements for future clinical study design and implementation as a guide for investigators studying PICU sedation and analgesia.

DESIGN

Twenty-five key elements framed as consensus statements were developed in five domains: study design, enrollment, protocol, outcomes and measurement instruments, and future directions.

SETTING

A virtual meeting was held on March 2-3, 2022, followed by an in-person meeting in Washington, DC, on June 15-16, 2022. Subsequent iterative online meetings were held to achieve consensus.

SUBJECTS

Fifty-one multidisciplinary, international participants from academia, industry, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and family members of PICU patients attended the virtual and in-person meetings. Participants were invited based on their background and experience.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Common themes throughout the SCEPTER IV consensus statements included using coordinated multidisciplinary and interprofessional teams to ensure culturally appropriate study design and diverse patient enrollment, obtaining input from PICU survivors and their families, engaging community members, and using developmentally appropriate and validated instruments for assessments of sedation, pain, iatrogenic withdrawal, and ICU delirium.

CONCLUSIONS

These SCEPTER IV consensus statements are comprehensive and may assist investigators in the design, enrollment, implementation, and dissemination of studies involving sedation and analgesia of PICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Implementation may strengthen the rigor and reproducibility of research studies on PICU sedation and analgesia and facilitate the synthesis of evidence across studies to improve the safety and quality of care for PICU patients.

Outcomes in pediatric anesthesia: towards a universal language

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The identification of valid, well defined and relevant outcomes is fundamental to provide a reliable and replicable measure that can be used to improve quality of clinical care and research output. The purpose of this review is to provide an update on what the pediatric anesthesia research community is pursuing on standardized and validated outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several initiatives by different research groups have been established during the last years. They all aim to find validated outcomes using the standardized methodology of COMET ( https://www.comet-initiative.org/ ). These initiatives focus on clinical and research outcomes on the field of anesthesia, perioperative medicine, pain and sedation in pediatric age.

SUMMARY

Clinical outcomes are measurements of changes in health, function or quality of life and they help evaluating quality of care. In order for them to be relevant in quantifying quality improvement, they need to be well defined, standardized and consistent across trials. A great effort from researchers has been made towards the identification of set of outcomes with these features.

Patient-maintained versus anaesthetist-controlled propofol sedation during elective primary lower-limb arthroplasty performed under spinal anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Patient-maintained propofol TCI sedation (PMPS) allows patients to titrate their own target-controlled infusion (TCI) delivery of propofol sedation using a handheld button. The aim of this RCT was to compare PMPS with anaesthetist-controlled propofol TCI sedation (ACPS) in patients undergoing elective primary lower-limb arthroplasty surgery under spinal anaesthesia.

METHODS

In this single-centre open-label investigator-led study, adult patients were randomly assigned to either PMPS or ACPS during their surgery. Both sedation regimes used Schnider effect-site TCI modelling. The primary outcome measure was infusion rate adjusted for weight (expressed as mg kg-1 h-1). Secondary outcomes measures included depth of sedation, occurrence of sedation-related adverse events and time to medical readiness for discharge from the postanaesthsia care unit (PACU).

RESULTS

Eighty patients (48 female) were randomised. Subjects using PMPS used 39.3% less propofol during the sedation period compared with subjects in group ACPS (1.56 [0.57] vs 2.57 [1.33] mg kg-1 h-1; P<0.001), experienced fewer discrete episodes of deep sedation (0 vs 6; P=0.0256), fewer airway/breathing adverse events (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 2.94 [1.31-6.64]; P=0.009) and were ready for discharge from PACU more quickly (8.94 [5.5] vs 13.51 [7.2] min; P=0.0027).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-maintained propofol sedation during lower-limb arthroplasty under spinal anaesthesia results in reduced drug exposure and fewer episodes of sedation-related adverse events compared with anaesthetist-controlled propofol TCI sedation. To facilitate further investigation of this procedural sedation technique, PMPS-capable TCI infusion devices should be submitted for regulatory approval for clinical use.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN29129799.

Design and reporting characteristics of clinical trials investigating sedation practices in the paediatric intensive care unit: a scoping review by SCEPTER (Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education and Research)

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a scoping review of sedation clinical trials in the paediatric intensive care setting and summarise key methodological elements.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and grey references including ClinicalTrials.gov from database inception to 3 August 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

All human trials in the English language related to sedation in paediatric critically ill patients were included. After title and abstract screening, full-text review was performed. 29 trials were eligible for final analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION

A coding manual was developed and pretested. Trial characteristics were double extracted.

RESULTS

The majority of trials were single centre (22/29, 75.9%), parallel group superiority (17/29, 58.6%), double-blinded (18/29, 62.1%) and conducted in an academic setting (29/29, 100.0%). Trial enrolment (≥90% planned sample size) was achieved in 65.5% of trials (19/29), and retention (≥90% enrolled subjects) in 72.4% of trials (21/29). Protocol violations were reported in nine trials (31.0%). The most commonly studied cohorts were mechanically ventilated patients (28/29, 96.6%) and postsurgical patients (11/29, 37.9%) with inclusion criteria for age ranging from 0±0.5 to 15.0±7.3 years (median±IQR). The median age of enrolled patients was 1.7 years (IQR=4.4 years). Patients excluded from trials were those with neurological impairment (21/29, 72.4%), complex disease (20/29, 69.0%) or receipt of neuromuscular blockade (10/29, 34.5%). Trials evaluated drugs/protocols for sedation management (20/29, 69.0%), weaning (3/29, 10.3%), daily interruption (3/29, 10.3%) or protocolisation (3/29, 10.3%). Primary outcome measures were heterogeneous, as were assessment instruments and follow-up durations.

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial heterogeneity in methodological approach in clinical trials evaluating sedation in critically ill paediatric patients. These results provide a basis for the design of future clinical trials to improve the quality of trial data and aid in the development of sedation-related clinical guidelines.

Design of Clinical Trials Evaluating Sedation in Critically Ill Adults Undergoing Mechanical Ventilation: Recommendations From Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research (SCEPTER) Recommendation III

OBJECTIVES

Clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of sedative medication use in critically ill adults undergoing mechanical ventilation differ considerably in their methodological approach. This heterogeneity impedes the ability to compare results across studies. The Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research Recommendations convened a meeting of multidisciplinary experts to develop recommendations for key methodologic elements of sedation trials in the ICU to help guide academic and industry clinical investigators.

DESIGN

A 2-day in-person meeting was held in Washington, DC, on March 28-29, 2019, followed by a three-round, online modified Delphi consensus process.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-six participants from academia, industry, and the Food and Drug Administration with expertise in relevant content areas, including two former ICU patients attended the in-person meeting, and the majority completed an online follow-up survey and participated in the modified Delphi process.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The final recommendations were iteratively refined based on the survey results, participants' reactions to those results, summaries written by panel moderators, and a review of the meeting transcripts made from audio recordings. Fifteen recommendations were developed for study design and conduct, subject enrollment, outcomes, and measurement instruments. Consensus recommendations included obtaining input from ICU survivors and/or their families, ensuring adequate training for personnel using validated instruments for assessments of sedation, pain, and delirium in the ICU environment, and the need for methodological standardization.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations are intended to assist researchers in the design, conduct, selection of endpoints, and reporting of clinical trials involving sedative medications and/or sedation protocols for adult ICU patients who require mechanical ventilation. These recommendations should be viewed as a starting point to improve clinical trials and help reduce methodological heterogeneity in future clinical trials.

High flow nasal oxygen during procedural sedation for cardiac implantable electronic device procedures: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

High flow nasal oxygen may better support the vulnerable respiratory state of patients during procedural sedation.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of high flow nasal oxygen in comparison to facemask oxygen on ventilation during cardiac implantable electronic device procedures performed with procedural sedation.

DESIGN

A randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

The study was conducted at one academic hospital in Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults undergoing elective cardiac implantable electronic device procedures with sedation administered by an anaesthesia assistant, supervised by an anaesthesiologist from August 2019 to March 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomised 1 : 1 to facemask (≥ 8 l · min-1) or high flow nasal oxygen (50 l · min-1 and a 50 : 50 oxygen to air ratio).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was peak transcutaneous carbon dioxide. Outcomes were analysed using Bayesian statistics.

RESULTS

The 129 participants who were randomised and received sedation were included. The difference in peak transcutaneous carbon dioxide was 0.0 kPa (95% CI -0.17 to 0.18). Minor adverse sedation events were 6.4 times more likely to occur in the high flow nasal oxygen group. This estimate is imprecise (95% CI 1.34 to 42.99). The odds ratio for oxygen desaturation for the high flow nasal oxygen group compared with the facemask group was 1.2 (95% CI 0.37 to 3.75). The difference in satisfaction with sedation scores between groups was 0.0 (95% CI -0.33 to 0.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Ventilation, as measured by TcCO2, is highly unlikely to differ by a clinically important amount between high flow nasal oxygen at 50 l min-1 or facemask oxygen at 8 l min-1. Further research with a larger sample size would be required to determine the optimal oxygen:air ratio when using high flow nasal oxygen during cardiac implantable electronic device procedures performed with sedation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03858257.

Satisfaction measures in pediatric anesthesia and perioperative care

Patient satisfaction is routinely used to assess the quality of care in medicine. In the field of anesthesia, research has been primarily directed toward developing satisfaction measures in adults with little attention paid to the pediatric population. Satisfaction in pediatric anesthesia and perioperative care is poorly understood. We have identified existing satisfaction measures in pediatric perioperative care and examined their similarities and differences. A search of relevant published trials up to January 2021 identified 17 studies using 14 unique satisfaction measures of perioperative care in children. Eleven of these assessed satisfaction multidimensionally while three assessed overall satisfaction of parents with their child's anesthesia. Of the six dimensions of satisfaction identified, all were duplicated to some degree across studies. The dimensions were: "staff rapport and communication" and "anesthetic and nursing quality of care" in eight satisfaction measures; "information giving" in seven measures; "postoperative symptom control" in six; "hospital experience" in five; and "involvement in decision-making" in three. The most important items from the parents' perspective were: "staff rapport and communication;" "information giving;" and "decision-making". No study examined all dimensions of satisfaction. Although all studies questioned parents, only three asked satisfaction questions of the child. No study was analyzed the child's direct responses. In three studies, parental involvement in decision-making was reported to be important as a satisfaction measure of their child's perioperative care. Of the few existing satisfaction measures evaluated, there is no accepted standard in current practice. Future studies identifying the important determinants of satisfaction in pediatric perioperative care, perhaps also using a Delphi approach with parents, might allow for the development of a patient-focused standardized measure in this setting.

Patient-maintained propofol sedation for adult patients undergoing surgical or medical procedures: a scoping review of current evidence and technology

Patient-maintained propofol sedation (PMPS) is the delivery of procedural propofol sedation by target-controlled infusion with the patient exerting an element of control over their target-site propofol concentration. This scoping review aims to establish the extent and nature of current knowledge regarding PMPS from both a clinical and technological perspective, thereby identifying knowledge gaps to guide future research. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and OpenGrey databases, identifying 17 clinical studies for analysis. PMPS is described in the context of healthy volunteers and in orthopaedic, general surgical, dental, and endoscopic clinical settings. All studies used modifications to existing commercially-available infusion devices to achieve prototype systems capable of PMPS. The current literature precludes rigorous generalisable conclusions regarding the safety or comparative clinical effectiveness of PMPS, however cautious acknowledgement of efficacy in specific clinical settings is appropriate. Based on the existing literature, together with new standardised outcome reporting recommendations for sedation research and frameworks designed to assess novel health technologies research, we have made recommendations for future pharmacological, clinical, behavioural, and health economic research on PMPS. We conclude that high-quality experimental clinical trials with relevant comparator groups assessing the impact of PMPS on standardised patient-orientated outcome measures are urgently required.

The development of a Consensus Conference on Pediatric Procedural Sedation in the Emergency Department in Italy: from here where to?

BACKGROUND

In Italy, as in many European countries, Pediatric Emergency Medicine is not formally recognized as a pediatric subspecialty, hindering nation-wide adoption of standards of care, especially in the field of procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in the Emergency Department (ED). For this reason PSA in Italy is mostly neglected or performed very heterogeneously and by different providers, with no reference standard. We aimed to describe the procedures and results of the first multidisciplinary and multi-professional Consensus Conference in Italy on safe and effective pediatric PSA in Italian EDs.

METHODS

The preparation, organization and conduct of the Consensus Conference, held in Florence in 2017, followed the recommended National methodological standards. Professionals from different specialties across the country were invited to participate.

RESULTS

Overall 86 recommendations covering 8 themes (pre-sedation evaluation, pharmacologic agents, monitoring, equipment and discharge checklists, training, non-pharmacologic techniques, the adult ED setting, impact on hospitalizations) were developed, taking into account the Italian training system and healthcare organization characteristics.

CONCLUSION

The results of the first multidisciplinary and multi-professional Consensus Conference in Italy are meant to provide up-to-date national guidance to improve the standard of care of children undergoing painful and stressful procedures in the ED. The recommendations will be periodically updated as new relevant evidence is published.

Future of paediatric sedation: towards a unified goal of improving practice

This review offers a perspective on the future of paediatric sedation. This future will require continued evaluation of adverse events, their risk factors, and predictors. As the introduction of new sedatives with paediatric applications will remain limited, the potential role of mainstay sedatives administered by new routes, for new indications, and with new delivery techniques, should be considered. The role of non-pharmacological strategies for anxiolysis, along with the application of non-mainstay physiologic monitoring, may aid in the improvement of targeted sedation delivery. Understanding the mechanism and location of action of the different sedatives will remain an important focus. Important developments in paediatric sedation will require that large scale studies with global data contribution be conducted in order to support changes in sedation practice, improve the patient experience, and make sedation safer.

Comparison of dexmedetomidine and benzodiazepine for intraoperative sedation in elderly patients: a randomized clinical trial

Background and objectives

Elderly individuals have a greater sensitivity to sedation, and the most commonly used drugs for sedation are benzodiazepines, which exhibit some complication. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the use of dexmedetomidine and midazolam regarding proper sedation and postoperative complications in elderly individuals who require intraoperative sedation.

Methods

This study was a parallel-randomized clinical trial, which included 120 patients aged >70 years undergoing regional anesthesia and sedation. The exclusion criteria consisted of bradycardia, heart failure, respiratory failure, a Glasgow Coma Scale ≤14, liver failure and refusal to participate. Patients were divided into two groups: the first group received midazolam (MDZ), while the second group received dexmedetomidine (DEX). The doses were titrated to achieve an intraoperative Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score between −3 and −1. Incidences of complications were recorded.

Results

During a 120 min follow-up, the depth of sedation (RASS score) revealed variations less often in the DEX group (p=0.002). Patients in the DEX group (n=67) had lower rates of intraoperative complications (19.4% vs 73.6%, p<0.001). Intraoperatively, the incidence rates of psychomotor agitation (15.1% vs 1.5%, p=0.005), arterial hypotension (28.3% vs 3.0%, p<0.001) and respiratory depression (73.6% vs 0%, p<0.001) were higher in the MDZ group (n=53). During postanesthesia care, the incidence rates of shivering (p<0.001), residual sedation (p=0.04) and use of supplemental oxygen (p<0.001) were significantly lower in the DEX group.

Conclusions

The use of DEX for sedation during surgery provides better control over the depth of sedation and produces fewer complications in elderly individuals.

Trial registration number

NCT02878837.

Psychometrics: Trust, but Verify

There is a continued mandate for practicing evidence-based medicine and the prerequisite rigorous analysis of the comparative effectiveness of alternative treatments. There is also an increasing emphasis on delivering value-based health care. Both these high priorities and their related endeavors require correct information about the outcomes of care. Accurately measuring and confirming health care outcomes are thus likely now of even greater importance. The present basic statistical tutorial focuses on the germane topic of psychometrics. In its narrower sense, psychometrics is the science of evaluating the attributes of such psychological tests. However, in its broader sense, psychometrics is concerned with the objective measurement of the skills, knowledge, and abilities, as well as the subjective measurement of the interests, values, and attitudes of individuals-both patients and their clinicians. While psychometrics is principally the domain and content expertise of psychiatry, psychology, and social work, it is also very pertinent to patient care, education, and research in anesthesiology, perioperative medicine, critical care, and pain medicine. A key step in selecting an existing or creating a new health-related assessment tool, scale, or survey is confirming or establishing the usefulness of the existing or new measure; this process conventionally involves assessing its reliability and its validity. Assessing reliability involves demonstrating that the measurement instrument generates consistent and hence reproducible results-in other words, whether the instrument produces the same results each time it is used in the same setting, with the same type of subjects. This includes interrater reliability, intrarater reliability, test-retest reliability, and internal reliability. Assessing validity is answering whether the instrument is actually measuring what it is intended to measure. This includes content validity, criterion validity, and construct validity. In evaluating a reported set of research data and its analyses, in a similar manner, it is important to assess the overall internal validity of the attendant study design and the external validity (generalizability) of its findings.