Pediatrics · 2003
Comparison of propofol/fentanyl versus ketamine/midazolam for brief orthopedic procedural sedation in a pediatric emergency department.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеКонтролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Godambe Sandip A, Elliot Vanessa, Matheny Dana, Pershad Jay
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of 2 medication regimens, propofol/fentanyl (P/F) and ketamine/midazolam (K/M), for brief orthopedic emergency department procedural sedation. This study was powered to compare recovery times (RT) and procedural distress as measured by the Observational Score of Behavioral Distress-revised (OSBD-r; range: 0-23.5 with 23.5 representing maximal distress).
METHODS: We conducted a prospective, partially-blinded controlled comparative trial comparing intravenous P/F with K/M in a convenience sample of 113 patients aged 3 to 18 years old undergoing orthopedic procedural sedation. All medications were administered by the intermittent intravenous bolus method. An independent sedation nurse recorded total sedation time and RT. Effectiveness was measured using 6 parameters: 1) patient distress as assessed by independent blinded observers after videotape review using the OSBD-r; 2) orthopedic satisfaction score (Likert scale 1-5); 3) sedation nurse satisfaction score (Likert 1-5); 4) parental perception of procedural pain using a 0 to 100 mm Visual Analog Scale with the upper limit being "most pain"; 5) patient recall of the procedure; and 6) 1 to 3 week follow-up.
RESULTS: RT and total sedation time were significantly less in the P/F group than in the K/M group (33.4 minutes vs 23.2 minutes). The mean OSBD-r scores during manipulation were 0.084 and 0.278 for the K/M and P/F groups, respectively. Although this difference was statistically significant (95% confidence interval for the mean difference -0.34 to -0.048), both regimens were successful in keeping the scores low. There was no statistical difference between the groups in the other measures of effectiveness. There was a statistically significant difference between the groups in the occurrence of desaturation and late side effects.
CONCLUSIONS: RT with P/F is shorter than with K/M. P/F is comparable to K/M in reducing procedural distress associated with painful orthopedic procedures in the pediatric emergency department. Although propofol has a greater potential of respiratory depression and airway obstruction as compared with ketamine, it offers some unique advantages including a quicker offset and smoother recovery profile.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective, partially-blinded controlled comparative trial comparing intravenous P/F with K/M in a convenience sample of 113 patients aged 3 to 18 years old undergoing orthopedic procedural sedation. All medications were administered by the intermittent intravenous bolus method. An independent sedation nurse recorded total sedation time and RT. Effectiveness was measured using 6 parameters: 1) patient distress as assessed by independent blinded observers after videotape review using the OSBD-r; 2) orthopedic satisfaction score (Likert scale 1-5); 3) sedation nurse satisfaction score (Likert 1-5); 4) parental perception of procedural pain using a 0 to 100 mm Visual Analog Scale with the upper limit being "most pain"; 5) patient recall of the procedure; and 6) 1 to 3 week follow-up.
RESULTS: RT and total sedation time were significantly less in the P/F group than in the K/M group (33.4 minutes vs 23.2 minutes). The mean OSBD-r scores during manipulation were 0.084 and 0.278 for the K/M and P/F groups, respectively. Although this difference was statistically significant (95% confidence interval for the mean difference -0.34 to -0.048), both regimens were successful in keeping the scores low. There was no statistical difference between the groups in the other measures of effectiveness. There was a statistically significant difference between the groups in the occurrence of desaturation and late side effects.
CONCLUSIONS: RT with P/F is shorter than with K/M. P/F is comparable to K/M in reducing procedural distress associated with painful orthopedic procedures in the pediatric emergency department. Although propofol has a greater potential of respiratory depression and airway obstruction as compared with ketamine, it offers some unique advantages including a quicker offset and smoother recovery profile.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdolescentAnalgesics, OpioidChildChild, PreschoolDrug CombinationsEmergenciesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleFentanylHospitals, PediatricHumansHypnotics and SedativesInjections, IntravenousKetamineMaleMidazolamOrthopedic ProceduresPropofolProspective StudiesRespiration DisordersSingle-Blind MethodVideotape RecordingWounds and Injuries