BACKGROUND: Pediatric patients often require sedation for diagnostic procedures such as magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography scanning. In October 2002, a dedicated sedation service was started at a tertiary care pediatric facility as a joint venture between pediatric emergency medicine and pediatric critical care medicine. Before this service, sedation was provided by the department of radiology by using a standard protocol, with high-risk patients and failed sedations referred for general anesthesia. OBJECTIVES: To describe the initial experience with a dedicated pediatric-sedation service. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of quality-assurance data collected on all sedations in the radiology department for 23-month periods before and after sedation-service implementation. Study variables were number and reasons for canceled or incomplete procedures, rates of referral for general anesthesia, rates of hypoxia, prolonged sedation, need for assisted ventilation, apnea, emesis, and paradoxical reaction to medication. Results are reported in odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Data from 5,444 sedations were analyzed; 2,148 before and 3,296 after sedation-service activation. Incomplete studies secondary to inadequate sedation decreased, from 2.7% before the service was created to 0.8% in the post-sedation-service period (OR, 0.29; 95% CI = 0.18 to 0.47). There also were decreases in cancellations caused by patient illness (3.8% vs. 0.6%; OR, 0.16; 95% CI = 0.10 to 0.27) and rates of hypoxia (8.8% vs. 4.6%; OR, 0.50; 95% CI = 0.40 to 0.63). There were no significant differences between the groups in rates of apnea, need for assisted ventilation, emesis, or prolonged sedation. The implementation of the sedation service also was associated with a decrease in both the number of patients referred to general anesthesia without a trial of sedation (from 2.1% to 0.1%; OR, 0.33; 95% CI = 0.06 to 1.46) and the total number of general anesthesia cases in the radiology department (from 7.5% to 4.4% of all patients requiring either sedation or anesthesia; OR, 0.56; 95% CI = 0.45 to 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a dedicated pediatric-sedation service resulted in fewer incomplete studies related to inadequate sedation, in fewer canceled studies secondary to patient illness, in fewer referrals for general anesthesia, and in fewer recorded instances of sedation-associated hypoxia. These findings have important implications in terms of patient safety and resource utilization.
BACKGROUND: Pediatric patients often require sedation for diagnostic procedures such as magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography scanning. In October 2002, a dedicated sedation service was started at a tertiary care pediatric facility as a joint venture between pediatric emergency medicine and pediatric critical care medicine. Before this service, sedation was provided by the department of radiology by using a standard protocol, with high-risk patients and failed sedations referred for general anesthesia. OBJECTIVES: To describe the initial experience with a dedicated pediatric-sedation service. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of quality-assurance data collected on all sedations in the radiology department for 23-month periods before and after sedation-service implementation. Study variables were number and reasons for canceled or incomplete procedures, rates of referral for general anesthesia, rates of hypoxia, prolonged sedation, need for assisted ventilation, apnea, emesis, and paradoxical reaction to medication. Results are reported in odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Data from 5,444 sedations were analyzed; 2,148 before and 3,296 after sedation-service activation. Incomplete studies secondary to inadequate sedation decreased, from 2.7% before the service was created to 0.8% in the post-sedation-service period (OR, 0.29; 95% CI = 0.18 to 0.47). There also were decreases in cancellations caused by patient illness (3.8% vs. 0.6%; OR, 0.16; 95% CI = 0.10 to 0.27) and rates of hypoxia (8.8% vs. 4.6%; OR, 0.50; 95% CI = 0.40 to 0.63). There were no significant differences between the groups in rates of apnea, need for assisted ventilation, emesis, or prolonged sedation. The implementation of the sedation service also was associated with a decrease in both the number of patients referred to general anesthesia without a trial of sedation (from 2.1% to 0.1%; OR, 0.33; 95% CI = 0.06 to 1.46) and the total number of general anesthesia cases in the radiology department (from 7.5% to 4.4% of all patients requiring either sedation or anesthesia; OR, 0.56; 95% CI = 0.45 to 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a dedicated pediatric-sedation service resulted in fewer incomplete studies related to inadequate sedation, in fewer canceled studies secondary to patient illness, in fewer referrals for general anesthesia, and in fewer recorded instances of sedation-associated hypoxia. These findings have important implications in terms of patient safety and resource utilization.