Comparison of the efficacy of ketamine– propofol versus sodium thiopental–fentanyl in sedation: a randomised clinical trial

2020 ◽  
pp. emermed-2020-209542
Author(s):  
Maryam Bahreini ◽  
Mostafa Talebi Garekani ◽  
Mehran Sotoodehnia ◽  
Fatemeh Rasooli

BackgroundMany sedative regimens have been studied with controversial efficiencies. This study tried to assess the desirable and adverse effects of sodium thiopental–fentanyl (TF) with ketamine–propofol (KP) for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department.MethodsAfter signing written consent, patients were enrolled in this randomised double-blind trial to receive either KP or TF to reach the desired sedation level. The respiratory and haemodynamic complications, nausea and vomiting, recovery agitation, patient recall and satisfaction, provider satisfaction and recovery time were compared.ResultsOf the participants, 47 in the KP group and 49 in the TF group were enrolled. The mean and SD scores were 6.91±1.93 and 8.34±1.25 for patients’ satisfaction and 7.55±1.54 and 8.65±1.00 for satisfaction of physicians performing the procedures in TF and KP groups, respectively (p=0.000). Moreover, 39 (79.59%) and 18 (38.29%) of patients declared that they had recalled the procedures in the TF and KP groups, respectively (p=0.000). Transient hypoxia was reported in 2.1% and 8.1% in the KP and TF groups leading to perform 4.2% vs 8.1% airway manoeuvres, respectively, without the need for endotracheal intubation or further admission.ConclusionsKP and TF combinations were effectively comparable although KP resulted in higher patient and provider satisfaction. This study did not detect a difference regarding adverse respiratory or haemodynamic effects. It is estimated that the TF combination can be potent and efficacious with possible low adverse events in procedural sedation.

CJEM ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 8 (02) ◽  
pp. 94-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Mensour ◽  
Robert Pineau ◽  
Vic Sahai ◽  
Jennifer Michaud

ABSTRACT Objectives: To determine the effectiveness and safety of procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in a Canadian community emergency department (ED) staffed primarily by family physicians and to assess the role of capnometry monitoring in PSA. Methods: One hundred and sixty (160) consecutive procedural sedation cases were reviewed from the ED of a rural hospital in Huntsville, Ont. The ED is mainly staffed by family physicians who have received in-house training in PSA. Safety and effectiveness measures were extrapolated from a standardized PSA form by a blinded research assistant. Results: The mean age of the patient population was 33.6 years (standard deviation = 23.6). Fifty-four percent of the patients were male, and 33% of the cases were pediatric. PSA medications included propofol (84%), fentanyl (51%) and midazolam (15%), and the procedural success rate was 95.6%. The adverse event (AE) rate was 18% and included apnea (10%), inadequate sedation (3%), bradycardia (2%), desaturation (1%), hypotension (1%) and bag-valve-mask use (1%). In those aged ≥65 years there was a greater incidence of apnea. There were no episodes of emesis and there were no intubations. A modified jaw thrust manoeuvre was used in 23% of the cases. In the 64% of cases where capnometry was used, there was no association between its use and any AE measures. Conclusion: Procedural sedation was safe and effective in our environment. Capnometry recording did not appear to alter outcomes, although the data are incomplete.


CJEM ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 9 (06) ◽  
pp. 421-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Zed ◽  
Riyad B. Abu-Laban ◽  
Winnie W.Y. Chan ◽  
David W. Harrison

ABSTRACT Objective: We evaluated the efficacy, safety and patient satisfaction with the use of propofol for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department (ED). Methods: All patients receiving propofol for procedural sedation and analgesia in the ED between December 1, 2003, and November 30, 2005, were prospectively assessed. Propofol was administered using a standardized protocol, which included an initial dose of 0.25–0.5 mg/kg followed by 10–20 mg/minute until sedated. Efficacy was evaluated using procedural success rate, recovery time and physician satisfaction. Adverse respiratory effects were defined as apnea for more than 30 seconds or an oxygen saturation of less than 90%. Hypotension was defined as systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg or > 20% decrease from baseline. Patient and physician satisfaction were determined using 5-point Likert scales. Results: Our study included 113 patients with a mean age of 50 (standard deviation [SD] 19) years; 62% were male. The most common procedures were orthopedic manipulation (44%), cardioversion (37%), and abscess incision and drainage (13%). The mean total propofol dose required was 1.6 (SD 0.9) mg/kg. Procedural success was achieved in 90% of cases and the mean patient recovery time was 7.6 (SD 3.4) minutes. No patient (0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0%–3%) experienced apnea; however, 1 patient (1%, 95% CI 0%–5%) experienced emesis, which resulted in an oxygen saturation <90%. Nine patients (8%, 95% CI 4%–15%) experienced hypotension and 7 (6%, 95% CI 3%–12%) experienced pain on injection. All patients were very satisfied (92%, 95% CI 85%–96%) or satisfied (8%, 95% CI 4%–15%), and 94% (95% CI 88%–98%) reported no recollection of the procedure. The majority of physicians were very satisfied (85%, 95% CI 77%–91%) or satisfied (6%, 95% CI 3%–12%) with the sedation and the conditions achieved. Conclusion: When administered as part of a standardized protocol, propofol appears to be a safe and effective agent for performing procedural sedation and analgesia in the ED, and is associated with high patient and physician satisfaction.


2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 312-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gadi Maoz ◽  
Daniel Stein ◽  
Sorin Meged ◽  
Larisa Kurzman ◽  
Joseph Levine ◽  
...  

Psychopharmacological interventions for managing aggression in schizophrenia have thus far yielded inconsistent results. This study evaluates the antiaggressive efficacy of combined haloperidol-propranolol treatment. Thirty-four newly admitted schizophrenic patients were studied in a controlled double-blind trial. Following a 3-day drug-free period and 7 days of haloperidol treatment, patients were randomly assigned to receive either haloperidol-propranolol or haloperidol-placebo for eight consecutive weeks. Doses of medications were adjusted as necessary; biperiden was administered if required. Rating scales were applied to assess aggression, anger, psychosis, depression, anxiety and extrapyramidal symptoms. The mean daily dose of haloperidol was 21 mg (SD = 6.4) in the research group and 29 mg (SD = 6.9) in the controls. Mean and maximal daily doses of propranolol were 159 mg (SD = 61) and 192 mg (SD = 83), and of placebo, 145 mg (SD = 50) and 180 mg (SD = 70), respectively. Compared with the controls, the scores for the research patients decreased significantly from baseline, particularly after 4 weeks of treatment, for some dimensions of anger, psychosis, anxiety, and neuroleptic-induced parkinsonism. A tendency for reduced aggression was shown in the combined haloperidol-propranolol group for some dimensions but not others. These patients also required significantly less biperiden. The tendency toward elevated antiaggressive effect of combined haloperidol-propranolol treatment compared to haloperidol alone may be explained by a simultaneous decrease in aggression, psychotic symptomatology, and anxiety.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document