Emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia: A Canadian Community Effectiveness and Safety Study (ACCESS)

Impact of capnography on patient safety in high- and low-income settings: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Capnography is universally accepted as an essential patient safety monitor in high-income countries (HICs) yet is often unavailable in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Increasing capnography availability has been proposed as one of many potential approaches to improving perioperative outcomes in LMICs. This scoping review summarises the existing literature on the effect of capnography on patient outcomes to help prioritise interventions and guide expansion of capnography in LMICs.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for articles published between 1980 and March 2019. Studies that assessed the impact of capnography on morbidity, mortality, or the use of airway interventions both inside and outside the operating room were included.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 7445 unique papers, and 31 were included for analysis. Retrospective and non-randomised data suggest capnography use may improve outcomes in the operating room, ICU, and emergency department, and during resuscitation. Prospective data on capnography use for procedural sedation suggest earlier detection of hypoventilation and a reduction in haemoglobin desaturation events. No randomised studies exist that assess the impact of capnography on patient outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Despite widespread endorsement of capnography as a mandatory perioperative monitor, rigorous data demonstrating its impact on patient outcomes are limited, especially in LMICs. The association between capnography use and a reduction in serious airway complications suggests that closing the capnography gap in LMICs may represent a significant opportunity to improve patient safety. Additional data are needed to quantify the global capnography gap and better understand the barriers to capnography scale-up in LMICs.

Procedural sedation and analgesia practices in the emergency centre

Introduction

Procedural sedation and analgesia allows the clinician to safely and efficiently administer sedation, analgesia, anxiolysis and sometimes amnesia to facilitate the performance of various procedures in the emergency centre. The aim of this study is to determine current sedation practices, common indications and major obstacles in selected emergency centres across Southern Gauteng, South Africa, with a view to improving future standards and practices.

Methods

This was a prospective, questionnaire based, cross-sectional interview of emergency centre managers or their designee of selected private-sector and public-sector hospitals in Southern Gauteng.

Results

Overall, 17 hospitals completed the interview, nine (53%) public-sector and eight (47%) private-sector hospitals, with 36% of hospitals being aligned to an academic institute. All hospitals performed procedural sedation in their emergency centre. Forty seven percent of managers had between ten and 19 years of clinical experience post internship. Although eleven (64.7%) managers achieved a postgraduate qualification in emergency medicine, only seven (41%) were accredited with a Fellowship of the College of Emergency Medicine (FCEM) qualification and only three (17.7%) centres employed three or more specialists. The majority of centres (52.3%) performed between ten and 30 procedures per month requiring sedation. Staff training in the practice of procedural sedation was mostly obtained internally (52.9%), from in-house seniors. Essential drugs, procedure monitors, resuscitation equipment and protocols were all available in 70.6% of centres.

Conclusion

Although the safe practice and awareness of procedural sedation and analgesia in both public-sector and private-sector emergency centres in Southern Gauteng appears to be on the increase, there is still a need to enhance practitioner training and promote awareness of current local and international trends, protocols and recommendations.

Community hospitals and their services in the NHS: identifying transferable learning from international developments – scoping review, systematic review, country reports and case studies

Background

The notion of a community hospital in England is evolving from the traditional model of a local hospital staffed by general practitioners and nurses and serving mainly rural populations. Along with the diversification of models, there is a renewed policy interest in community hospitals and their potential to deliver integrated care. However, there is a need to better understand the role of different models of community hospitals within the wider health economy and an opportunity to learn from experiences of other countries to inform this potential.

Objectives

This study sought to (1) define the nature and scope of service provision models that fit under the umbrella term ‘community hospital’ in the UK and other high-income countries, (2) analyse evidence of their effectiveness and efficiency, (3) explore the wider role and impact of community engagement in community hospitals, (4) understand how models in other countries operate and asses their role within the wider health-care system, and (5) identify the potential for community hospitals to perform an integrative role in the delivery of health and social care.

Methods

A multimethod study including a scoping review of community hospital models, a linked systematic review of their effectiveness and efficiency, an analysis of experiences in Australia, Finland, Italy, Norway and Scotland, and case studies of four community hospitals in Finland, Italy and Scotland.

Results

The evidence reviews found that community hospitals provide a diverse range of services, spanning primary, secondary and long-term care in geographical and health system contexts. They can offer an effective and efficient alternative to acute hospitals. Patient experience was frequently reported to be better at community hospitals, and the cost-effectiveness of some models was found to be similar to that of general hospitals, although evidence was limited. Evidence from other countries showed that community hospitals provide a wide spectrum of health services that lie on a continuum between serving a ‘geographic purpose’ and having a specific population focus, mainly older people. Structures continue to evolve as countries embark on major reforms to integrate health and social care. Case studies highlighted that it is important to consider local and national contexts when looking at how to transfer models across settings, how to overcome barriers to integration beyond location and how the community should be best represented.

Limitations

The use of a restricted definition may have excluded some relevant community hospital models, and the small number of countries and case studies included for comparison may limit the transferability of findings for England. Although this research provides detailed insights into community hospitals in five countries, it was not in its scope to include the perspective of patients in any depth.

Conclusions

At a time when emphasis is being placed on integrated and community-based care, community hospitals have the potential to assume a more strategic role in health-care delivery locally, providing care closer to people’s homes. There is a need for more research into the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of community hospitals, the role of the community and optimal staff profile(s).

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Community Hospitals in Selected High Income Countries: A Scoping Review of Approaches and Models

BACKGROUND

There is no single definition of a community hospital in the UK, despite its long history. We sought to understand the nature and scope of service provision in community hospitals, within the UK and other high-income countries.

METHODS

We undertook a scoping review of literature on community hospitals published from 2005 to 2014. Data were extracted on features of the hospital model and the services provided, with results presented as a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

75 studies were included from ten countries. Community hospitals provide a wide range of services, with wide diversity of provision appearing to reflect local needs. Community hospitals are staffed by a mixture of general practitioners (GPs), nurses, allied health professionals and healthcare assistants. We found many examples of collaborative working arrangements between community hospitals and other health care organisations, including colocation of services, shared workforce with primary care and close collaboration with acute specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

Community hospitals are able to provide a diverse range of services, responding to geographical and health system contexts. Their collaborative nature may be particularly important in the design of future models of care delivery, where emphasis is placed on integration of care with a key focus on patient-centred care.

Procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department

Procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) is a core part of modern emergency department (ED) care allowing the rapid provision of important procedures. The safe delivery of a PSA service requires an appropriately staffed and equipped environment backed up by an ongoing system of training, audit and review. Topics covered in this review include: the evidence relating to the agents used; patient care before, during and after the procedure; the outcomes of ED PSA; and, the special considerations relating to PSA in children.

Efficacy, safety and patient satisfaction of propofol for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department: a prospective study

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.

Pharmacological sedation for cranial computed tomography in children after minor blunt head trauma

OBJECTIVE

Children evaluated in emergency departments for blunt head trauma (BHT) frequently undergo computed tomography (CT), with some requiring pharmacological sedation. Cranial CT sedation complications are understudied. The objective of this study was to document the frequency, type, and complications of pharmacological sedation for cranial CT in children.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled children (younger than 18 years) with minor BHT presenting to 25 emergency departments from 2004 to 2006. Data collected included sedation agent and complications. We excluded patients with Glasgow Coma Scale scores of less than 14.

RESULTS

Of 57,030 eligible patients, 43,904 (77%) were enrolled in the parent study; 15,176 (35%) had CT scans performed or planned, and 527 (3%) received pharmacological sedation for CT. Sedated patients' characteristics were as follows: median age, 1.7 years (interquartile range, 1.1-2.5 years); male 61%; Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15, 86%; traumatic brain injury on CT, 8%. There were 488 patients (93%) who received 1 sedative. Sedation use (0%-21%) and regimen varied by site. Pentobarbital (n = 164) and chloral hydrate (n = 149) were the most frequently used agents. Sedation complications occurred in 49 patients (9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7%-12%): laryngospasm 1 (0.2%; 95% CI, 0%-1.1%), failed sedation 31 (6%; 95% CI, 4%-8%), vomiting 6 (1%; 95% CI, 0.4%-2%), hypotension 13 (4%; 95% CI, 2%-7%), and hypoxia 1 (0.2%; 95% CI, 0%-2%). No cases of apnea, aspiration, or reversal agent use occurred. One patient required intubation. Vomiting and failed sedation were most common with chloral hydrate.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacological sedation is infrequently used for children with minor BHT undergoing CT, and complications are uncommon. The variability in sedation medications and frequency suggests a need for evidence-based guidelines.

Middle latency auditory-evoked potential index for predicting the degree of consciousness of comatose patients in EDs

INTRODUCTION

Digitized assessment of the degree of consciousness is a universal challenge in emergency departments (EDs) and intensive care units (ICUs). The middle latency auditory-evoked potential index (MLAEPi) monitor aepEX plus (Audiomex, Glasgow, Scotland, UK) is the first mobile middle latency auditory-evoked potential monitor. We speculated that the initial MLAEPi determined on arrival at EDs could indicate cerebral function and predict the degree of consciousness of comatose patients.

METHODS

We used MLAEPi-related data from 50 comatose patients with disturbance of consciousness (DOC), 50 patients with cardiopulmonary arrest (CPA), and 50 healthy volunteers (control). Comatose patients were defined as those with an initial Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or less. The CPA group consisted of patients who arrived at EDs without restoration of spontaneous circulation. Among the patients with DOC who underwent sedation at EDs, the change in the MLAEPi was evaluated between arrival at the ED and ICU admission.

RESULTS

The initial MLAEPi was significantly lower in the DOC group than in the control group but significantly higher in the DOC group than in the CPA group. Among the comatose patients, the receiver operating characteristic curve for the initial MLAEPi showed an area under the curve of 0.93 (P < .01) for the DOC group. Thirty patients with DOC underwent sedation at EDs, and the initial MLAEPi was significantly higher than those at other periods during emergency care.

CONCLUSION

The MLAEPi (simple numerical value) may be used to evaluate the degree of consciousness in comatose patients while performing emergency care in EDs.

Propofol for Procedural Sedation in the Emergency Department: A Qualitative Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of propofol compared to other agents for procedural sedation of adults in the emergency department (ED) and to review the use of opioids in conjunction with propofol for procedural sedation in the ED.

DATA SOURCES:

PubMed (1949-December 2012) and EMBASE (1980-December 2012) were searched using combinations of the following search terms: (procedural sedation or conscious sedation [MESH]) and propofol. A manual search of references was also performed.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION:

English-language, full reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies evaluating propofol use in adults undergoing procedural sedation in the ED were included if they reported efficacy or safety outcomes. Two reviewers independently assessed each article for inclusion, data extraction, and study limitations.

DATA SYNTHESIS:

Thirteen RCTs and 20 observational studies meeting our inclusion criteria were retrieved. Regardless of the agent used for sedation, procedural success was greater than 80% and most trials demonstrated no statistically significant difference in the incidence of respiratory depression with propofol compared to alternatives. One RCT showed a significantly greater percent decrease in systolic blood pressure from baseline in those who received propofol compared to ketamine. Where reported, no significant difference was found in patient recall, pain, and satisfaction when opioids were added to propofol compared to propofol alone; the addition of opioids may have resulted in a higher incidence of respiratory adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS:

Propofol for procedural sedation is a reasonable alternative for use in the ED, with comparative efficacy and safety to other alternatives. Use of opioids in addition to propofol may not provide added benefit but does contribute to increased rates of adverse events.

Sedation-assisted Orthopedic Reduction in Emergency Medicine: The Safety and Success of a One Physician/One Nurse Model

Introduction

Much of the emergency medical research on sedation-assisted orthopedic reductions has been undertaken with two physicians––one dedicated to the sedation and one to the procedure. Clinical practice in community emergency departments (EDs), however, often involves only one physician, who both performs the procedure and simultaneously oversees the crendentialed registered nurse who administers the sedation medication and monitors the patient. Although the dual-physician model is advocated by some, evidence in support of its superiority is lacking.

Methods:

In this electronic health records review we describe sedation-assisted closed reductions of major joints and forearm fractures in three suburban community EDs. The type of procedure and sedation medication, need for specialty assistance, success rates, and intervention-requiring adverse events are reported.

Results:

During the 18-month study period, procedural sedation was performed 457 times on 442 patients undergoing closed reduction for shoulder dislocations (n = 111), elbow dislocations (n = 29), hip dislocations (n = 101), and forearm fractures (n = 201). In the vast majority of this cohort (98.4% [435/442]), a single emergency physician simultaneously managed both the procedural sedation and the initial orthopedic reduction without the assistance of a second physician. The reduction was successful or satisfactory in 96.6% (425/435; 95% confidence interval [CI], 95.8–98.8%) of these cases, with a low incidence of intervention-requiring adverse events (2.8% [12/435]; 95% CI, 1.5–4.8%).

Conclusion:

Sedation-assisted closed reduction of major joint dislocations and forearm fractures can be performed effectively and safely in the ED using a one physician/one nurse model. A policy that requires a separate physician (or nurse anesthetist) to administer medications for all sedation-assisted ED procedures appears unwarranted. Further research is needed to determine which specific clinical scenarios might benefit from a dual-physician approach.

Procedural sedation with propofol for painful orthopaedic manipulation in the emergency department expedites patient management compared with a midazolam/ketamine regimen: a randomized prospective study

BACKGROUND

The use of procedural sedation and analgesia to allow painful orthopaedic manipulations in the emergency department has become a standard practice over the last decade. Both propofol and midazolam/ketamine are attractive sedative regimens for routine use in the emergency department. We hypothesized that sedation with propofol as compared with midazolam/ketamine will save time in the emergency department. The purpose of the present study was to compare the recovery time, the total sedation time, and the adverse events of procedural sedation and analgesia induced with propofol as compared with midazolam/ketamine.

METHODS

This prospective randomized study was conducted in the emergency department of a tertiary care, university-affiliated medical center. All sedations and orthopaedic manipulations were performed by trained and approved orthopaedic residents assisted by a registered nurse according to the same protocol. Sedation time and adverse events were recorded in real time.

RESULTS

Sixty adults (thirty-five men and twenty-five women) with a mean age (and standard deviation) of 45 ± 17 years were randomly enrolled in the study, with thirty patients being managed with each regimen. The average recovery time was 7.8 ± 3.7 minutes following sedation with propofol, compared with 30.7 ± 10.1 minutes following sedation with midazolam/ketamine (p < 0.001). The average total sedation time was 16.2 ± 3.8 minutes for the propofol group, compared with 41.6 ± 10.7 minutes for the midazolam/ketamine group (p < 0.001). The overall rate of respiratory and hemodynamic adverse events was 20% for the propofol group and 10% for the midazolam/ketamine group.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of propofol for an orthopaedic procedure requiring sedation in the emergency department expedites patient management and saves time in comparison with the use of midazolam/ketamine.

Adverse events associated with ketamine for procedural sedation in adults

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Ketamine is widely used as a procedural sedation agent in pediatrics, where its safety and efficacy are supported by numerous studies. Emergency physicians use ketamine infrequently in adults, as it is believed to have a more significant side effect profile in this population. However, adult data on ketamine use in the emergency medicine literature are sparse. Our objective was to determine ketamine's adverse effect profile in adults when used for procedural sedation.

METHODS

We performed a literature review based on adverse effect research methodology recommendations. PubMed, EMBASE, TOXNET, and a variety of specialized databases were queried without regard to publication date or language. Experts were contacted to locate additional data. Inclusion criteria included adult study; ketamine used to facilitate the performance of painful procedures; dose of at least 1 mg/kg intravenous or at least 2 mg/kg intramuscular; original data and adverse events reported; spontaneously breathing patient, and no continuous cotherapies. Studies that met inclusion criteria were abstracted onto structured forms and their results qualitatively summarized.

RESULTS

Of the 5512 unique citations that were evaluated, 87 met criteria for inclusion. Most studies were performed in the 1970s and published in the anesthesia literature. Contexts, end points, and methodological quality varied widely across studies. Ketamine reliably produces conditions that facilitate the performance of painful procedures. Pharyngeal reflexes are generally preserved and cardiovascular tone stimulated, including a rise in blood pressure and myocardial oxygen demand. Laryngospasm and airway obstruction are reported, and though ketamine is a respiratory stimulant, a brief period of apnea around the time of injection is common. Reports of significant cardiorespiratory adverse events are rare, despite ketamine's frequent use in austere, poorly monitored settings. Dysphoric emergence phenomena occur in 10% to 20% of cases; sedating medications are effective in preventing and managing these reactions.

CONCLUSION

When ketamine is used for procedural sedation in adults, emergence phenomena occur in 10% to 20% of patients. Although providers must be prepared to recognize and manage airway obstruction, cardiorespiratory adverse events are rare and typically do not affect outcomes.

Safety and clinical effectiveness of midazolam versus propofol for procedural sedation in the emergency department: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To synthesize the evidence comparing the adverse event (AE) profile and clinical effectiveness of midazolam and propofol for procedural sedation (PS) in adults in the emergency care setting.

METHODS

The authors conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting the use of either midazolam and/or propofol for adult PS in the emergency department (ED). A systematic search strategy was developed and applied to six bibliographic reference databases. Three emergency medicine journals, the Canadian Adverse Drug Reaction Newsletter, and conference proceedings were hand-searched. Retrieved articles were reviewed and data were abstracted using standardized data collection. Trial quality was assessed using the Jadad score. The outcomes assessed were the proportion of patients with AEs and the pooled mean difference in the proportion of patients with successful PS.

RESULTS

Of 229 articles identified, 28 met the inclusion criteria for the analysis of AEs. Only one major AE to PS was found, resulting in no statistically significant difference in the proportion of major AEs between agents. Four studies were RCTs that met the inclusion criteria for the analysis of clinical effectiveness. Two trials met criteria for good quality. The RCTs enrolled between 32 and 86 patients, and the most common indications for PS were orthopedic reductions and cardioversions. There was a nonsignificant difference in the proportion of patients with successful PS in favor of propofol (effect difference 2.9%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -6.5 to 15.2).

CONCLUSIONS

The authors found no significant difference in the safety profile and the proportion of successful PS between midazolam and propofol for adults in the ED.

Scope creep: when nursing practice moves beyond traditional boundaries: an evidence-based example using procedural sedation

The finite boundaries of the scope of nursing practice are constantly changing. One could expect that with new technology and advances in science, the interventions and assessments nurses perform will change over time. The practice of nursing is governed by nursing, however, it is often challenged by our partners in medicine, and frequently driven by time constraints or reimbursement issues. This article reviews a case example in which nurses were asked to expand their practice to assume responsibility for duties that were once traditionally performed by physicians. An evaluation of a practice problem using an evidence-based approach applying the PICO (population, intervention, comparison, outcome) method is explored. Proposed steps to minimize risk and staff moral distress are also described.

Sedation in the emergency department

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The recent year's literature is reviewed concerning the use of sedation in the emergency department. The use of moderate to deep sedation is becoming common in emergency medicine for many reasons, including progressive hospital crowding, limited availability of anesthesia, and increased training in residency. This is performed for a wide variety of procedures, most commonly orthopedic.

RECENT FINDINGS

The literature discussed medications, monitoring, and the safety of current sedation practice in the emergency department. Emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia is performed with a number of medications, including propofol, etomidate, midazolam, fentanyl, ketamine, and nitrous oxide. Cardiac monitoring, pulse oximetry and capnography are used, often without strong evidence-based support of need. Complications do occur and are higher in prospective studies than in retrospective series. This suggests a degree of underreporting. Nevertheless, clinically important complications are uncommon.

SUMMARY

The year's literature reflects the reality that the performance of sedation in the emergency department is advantageous. As the era of evidence-based medicine continues to provide us with more and better information, the combined efforts of both anesthesiology and emergency medicine can hopefully contribute to improving patient safety with respect to procedural sedation.