Annals of emergency medicine · 2014
Randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial of propofol, 1:1 propofol/ketamine, and 4:1 propofol/ketamine for deep procedural sedation in the emergency department.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАVideo-Audio MediaНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Miner James R, Moore Johanna C, Austad Erin J, Plummer David, Hubbard Laura, Gray Richard O
Аннотация
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We compare the frequency of airway and respiratory adverse events leading to an intervention between propofol with 1:1 and 4:1 mixtures of propofol and ketamine (ketofol).
METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blinded trial in which emergency department adults undergoing deep sedation received propofol, 1:1 propofol and ketamine, or 4:1 propofol and ketamine. Our primary outcome was the frequency of airway and respiratory adverse events leading to an intervention. Other outcomes included sedation depth, efficacy, procedure and recovery time, patient satisfaction, pain, and procedural recall.
RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-one subjects completed the trial, 90 receiving propofol, 85 receiving 1:1 propofol and ketamine, and 96 receiving 4:1 propofol and ketamine. Airway or respiratory adverse events leading to an intervention were similar between groups: 29%, 19%, and 32%, respectively (P=.21). There were no serious adverse events in any group. Secondary outcomes were generally similar between groups, with greater recovery agitation observed in the 1:1 ketofol group (8%, 21%, and 10%, respectively).
CONCLUSION: We found a similar frequency of airway and respiratory adverse events leading to intervention between propofol alone and either 1:1 or 4:1 ketofol.
METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blinded trial in which emergency department adults undergoing deep sedation received propofol, 1:1 propofol and ketamine, or 4:1 propofol and ketamine. Our primary outcome was the frequency of airway and respiratory adverse events leading to an intervention. Other outcomes included sedation depth, efficacy, procedure and recovery time, patient satisfaction, pain, and procedural recall.
RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-one subjects completed the trial, 90 receiving propofol, 85 receiving 1:1 propofol and ketamine, and 96 receiving 4:1 propofol and ketamine. Airway or respiratory adverse events leading to an intervention were similar between groups: 29%, 19%, and 32%, respectively (P=.21). There were no serious adverse events in any group. Secondary outcomes were generally similar between groups, with greater recovery agitation observed in the 1:1 ketofol group (8%, 21%, and 10%, respectively).
CONCLUSION: We found a similar frequency of airway and respiratory adverse events leading to intervention between propofol alone and either 1:1 or 4:1 ketofol.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnesthetics, DissociativeDeep SedationDose-Response Relationship, DrugDouble-Blind MethodDrug Administration ScheduleDrug CombinationsEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHumansHypnotics and SedativesKetamineMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePropofolRespiration DisordersYoung Adult