BMC anesthesiology · 2025
Risk factors for adverse reactions to nurse-administered propofol during outpatient endoscopy: a cross-sectional study.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Villanueva Renzo Inca, Montero Cynthia Bazán, Bulnes-Montánchez María Estela, Alva Lary Salazar, Carrillo José Salvador, Zevallos Alejandra, Salazar Fernando
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic procedures are essential for diagnosing and managing gastrointestinal conditions, often requiring sedation for patient comfort. Propofol is a common choice for outpatient sedation due to its rapid onset and predictable recovery time. Although propofol has an established safety profile, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) can still occur. This study investigated the prevalence and risk factors associated with ADRs related to nurse-administered propofol sedation during outpatient endoscopic procedures at a private hospital in Peru.
METHOD: We conducted a retrospective study. The clinical records of 919 Peruvian patients who underwent endoscopic interventions under propofol sedation were reviewed. This study included patients between the ages of 18 and 69 years who had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification scores of I-III and who were hemodynamically stable with an oxygen saturation (SO2) > 90% before the procedure. Sedation was nurse-administered using standardized protocols. ADR data, including severity and causality assessment data, were collected. Data were collected and analyzed by SPSS, Inc., and the statistical significance was calculated at the p < 0.05 level.
RESULTS: A total of 693 patients were included in the study, 30.9% of whom experienced at least one ADR, predominantly cardiovascular or respiratory events such as hypotension and hypoxia, with causality scores classified as probable or definitive. Among the ADRs, 35.8% (n = 87) were moderately severe, and 64.2% (n = 143) were mildly severe. There were no reports of any serious adverse events. An ASA class III status (p = 0.048, PR adjusted (PRa) = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.01-2.99) and a procedure time of more than 20 min (p < 0.0001, PRa = 2.05, 95% CI: 1.53-2.73) were significant risk factors for ADR occurrence. Patients with ADRs had longer recovery times than did those without ADRs (22 min ± 22.5 vs. 14 min ± 8, respectively; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: In our work, moderate propofol sedation administered by trained nursing staff to outpatients undergoing interventional endoscopic procedures was generally safe but not free from risks. Vital parameters should be monitored regularly during long-term interventions and when patients are classified as ASA III.
METHOD: We conducted a retrospective study. The clinical records of 919 Peruvian patients who underwent endoscopic interventions under propofol sedation were reviewed. This study included patients between the ages of 18 and 69 years who had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification scores of I-III and who were hemodynamically stable with an oxygen saturation (SO2) > 90% before the procedure. Sedation was nurse-administered using standardized protocols. ADR data, including severity and causality assessment data, were collected. Data were collected and analyzed by SPSS, Inc., and the statistical significance was calculated at the p < 0.05 level.
RESULTS: A total of 693 patients were included in the study, 30.9% of whom experienced at least one ADR, predominantly cardiovascular or respiratory events such as hypotension and hypoxia, with causality scores classified as probable or definitive. Among the ADRs, 35.8% (n = 87) were moderately severe, and 64.2% (n = 143) were mildly severe. There were no reports of any serious adverse events. An ASA class III status (p = 0.048, PR adjusted (PRa) = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.01-2.99) and a procedure time of more than 20 min (p < 0.0001, PRa = 2.05, 95% CI: 1.53-2.73) were significant risk factors for ADR occurrence. Patients with ADRs had longer recovery times than did those without ADRs (22 min ± 22.5 vs. 14 min ± 8, respectively; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: In our work, moderate propofol sedation administered by trained nursing staff to outpatients undergoing interventional endoscopic procedures was generally safe but not free from risks. Vital parameters should be monitored regularly during long-term interventions and when patients are classified as ASA III.