Comparison of patient-controlled sedation with either methohexitone or propofol

Recent developments in patient-controlled analgesia

Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) has become the gold standard for acute pain management since it was first introduced 20 years ago, and its merits have been discussed in quite a large number of publications. This review summarizes the more recent developments, such as new application devices and strategies, including intranasal, spinal, and regional PCA; patient-controlled sedation; experience with children and elderly people; and some data from chronic pain situations. Analyzing PCA literature from 2001 onwards confirms the author's long belief that the PCA principle ("WYNIWYG": what you need is what you get) was the most important aspect of a patient-controlled strategy, more or less independent of the type of drug or machine. Discovering this principle has changed the understanding of pain and suffering.

Propofol intravenous conscious sedation for anxious children in a specialist paediatric dentistry unit

OBJECTIVES

To report on both the use and dosage of propofol, as a new intravenous (IV) conscious sedative agent, for anxious children referred to a specialist paediatric dentistry service.

SETTING

Paediatric Dentistry Unit, Glasgow Dental Hospital and School.

SAMPLE

Thirty-four children, 25 females and 9 males, mean age 12 years 10 months, with a mean weight of 54.6 kg (range 30-110 kg).

METHODS

Report from 34 patients receiving intravenous sedation for the first time in respect of weight dose and amount of treatment completed.

RESULTS

Thirty-two children successfully accepted operative dental care on their first visit, they received a mean total dose of 146.25 mg of propofol (range 10 mg to 356 mg); in relation to body weight, the mean was 2.5 mg/kg (range 0.2-5.4 mg/kg). The treatment that they received included fissure sealants, amalgam and adhesive restorations, root canal therapy and single and multiple extractions. Their sedation and recovery were uneventful.

CONCLUSIONS

Sub-anaesthetic doses of propofol used for IV conscious sedation infusion facilitated operative dental treatment in anxious children.

Safer colonoscopy with patient-controlled analgesia and sedation with propofol and alfentanil

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of patient-controlled analgesia and sedation with propofol/alfentanil for colonoscopy compared with continuous drug infusion and conventional nurse-administered medication.

METHODS

One hundred fifty patients undergoing colonoscopy on an outpatient basis were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 medication regimens. To maintain blinding, all patients were connected to an infusion pump. Group I patients could self-administer boluses of 4.8 mg propofol and 125 microg alfentanil without restriction. Group II patients received a continuous infusion with 0.048 mg/kg propofol and 0.12 microg/kg alfentanil per minute. Group III patients received intravenous premedication with 0.035 mg/kg midazolam and 0.35 mg/kg meperidine.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the groups with respect to pain (visual analogue scale) and procedure time. Patient-controlled analgesia and sedation with propofol/alfentanil (group I) resulted in less of an increase in the transcutaneous partial pressure of carbon dioxide (p = 0.0004) during colonoscopy and less of a decrease in mean arterial blood pressure (p = 0.0021) during recovery, as well as more complete recovery (p = 0.0019) after 45 minutes compared with conventional administration of midazolam/meperidine. Furthermore, patient-controlled analgesia and sedation yielded a higher degree of patient satisfaction than continuous infusion of propofol/alfentanil (p = 0.0033) or nurse-administered midazolam/meperidine (p = 0.0094).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-controlled administration of propofol and alfentanil for colonoscopy may provide a better margin of safety than conventional administration of midazolam and meperidine and results in a higher level of patient satisfaction and shorter recovery.

Acute pain and pain control: state of the art

Recognition and treatment of pain in the emergency department has undergone an evolution in the past decade. Emergency clinicians, educators, and researchers have begun to address the undertreatment of pain as well as challenge the long-standing dogmas concerning pain treatment. Well-described barriers, both psychological and educational, contribute to our providing inadequate pain relief. This state-of-the-art update describes the current perception of our practice with regard to pain relief and how it can be modified. Pain and pain control is such a broad and complex topic that only new advances and important principles relevant to the practice of emergency medicine are presented. Headache, pediatric pain, and procedural sedation and analgesia are not covered in this article as they will be addressed in future state-of-the-art articles.

Sedation for vitreoretinal surgery: a comparison of anaesthetist-administered midazolam and patient-controlled sedation with propofol

Local anaesthesia is increasingly being used for vitreoretinal surgery, but the optimal technique for sedation remains unclear. Anaesthetist-administered midazolam, which is often used, was compared in this study to patient-controlled sedation with propofol in 43 patients undergoing 50 vitreoretinal procedures. A variety of patient, anaesthetist and surgical endpoints were measured. There were no significant outcome differences between the two agents except that midazolam produced more amnesia for the local anaesthetic eye block. However, several outcomes and the observations in patients who experienced both agents showed a trend in favour of propofol for intraoperative sedation. We conclude that both approaches are safe and that patient-controlled sedation with propofol is at least as satisfactory as anaesthetist-administered midazolam.

Propofol anesthesia for outpatient oral and maxillofacial surgery

Propofol is a sedative-hypnotic intravenous anesthetic agent that has gained wide use in outpatient oral and maxillofacial surgery since its clinical introduction in 1985. Propofol has several therapeutic advantages that make it an excellent choice for use in all phases of general anesthesia and conscious sedation. It is associated with minimal side effects, a controllable anesthetic state, and rapid recovery. This review of propofol discusses its pharmacologic character, administration, and side effects and presents anesthetic drug interaction information and comparisons.

[Patient-controlled sedation with propofol for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy]

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of patient-controlled sedation with propofol for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) using an EDAP LT01 lithotriptor.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective clinical study.

PATIENTS

Fifty consecutive patients, ASA I or II, aged 18-65 years.

METHODS

Patients received 50 mg of propofol five minutes before ESWL, then they self-administered 50 mg bolus doses of propofol with a ten minutes lock-out interval. Pain (1-100 mm VAS) and sedation (four points scale) were assessed every five minutes. Patient satisfaction was recorded at the end of the procedure. Pharmacokinetic simulation was done with the Marsh's data set.

RESULTS

Three patients were excluded. Patients received a mean propofol dose of 147 +/- 68 mg during the procedure with a mean duration of 47 +/- 8 minutes. The median of the higher sedation scores was 2 (drowsy) and mean maximal VAS was 40 +/- 20 mm (10-70). No complications were recorded. Thirty-nine patients (83%) were satisfied or very satisfied by patient-controlled sedation.

CONCLUSION

Patient-controlled sedation with propofol is a safe and efficient mode of administration of an hypnotic agent for ESWL.