Literature DB >> 16810592

Quality of psychomotor recovery after propofol sedation for routine endoscopy: a randomized and controlled study.

A Riphaus1, T Gstettenbauer, M B Frenz, T Wehrmann.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Propofol sedation is increasingly being used for endoscopy in the outpatient setting. In view of the agent's short period of action, current recommendations that patients should avoid driving or using public transport unescorted for 24 h may be too strict. Psychomotor recovery and driving skills before and after sedation were therefore assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 100 patients undergoing routine upper or lower gastrointestinal endoscopy were randomly sedated either with propofol alone or with midazolam plus pethidine. The recovery time and quality of recovery were assessed. Psychomotor recovery was evaluated using the number connection test (NCT) and a driving simulator test 1 h before and 2 h after the endoscopic procedure.
RESULTS: Ninety-six patients completed the 2-hour post-sedation procedure. Vital signs were recorded, and no clinically relevant complications occurred. The mean recovery time and quality of recovery were significantly better after propofol sedation (14 +/- 9 min vs. 25 +/- 8 min and 8.7 +/- 1.3 vs. 6.3 +/- 1.1 points) ( P < 0.01). Psychomotor and driving skills after propofol sedation were similar to the baseline results, while in the midazolam/pethidine group, patients showed significantly more lane deviations (1.1 +/- 0.9 vs. 1.6 +/- 0.9), time over the speed limit (0.3 +/- 0.83 vs. 0.6 +/- 0.88), missed stoplights more often (0.05 +/- 0.31 vs. 0.11 +/- 0.35), and had slower reaction times for unexpected events (1.11 +/- 0.46 s vs. 1.39 +/- 0.44 s) ( P < 0.01). The time needed to complete the NCT after sedation did not differ between the two groups (32.1 +/- 12.0 s vs. 33.4 +/- 12.6 s for propofol; 31.5 +/- 11.2 s vs. 34.6 +/- 12.8 s for midazolam/pethidine).
CONCLUSIONS: Current recommendations that patients should refrain from driving and unescorted use of public transport for 24 h after sedation may need to be reconsidered in patients who receive propofol sedation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16810592     DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-925244

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  22 in total

1.  Prospective description of coughing, hemodynamic changes, and oxygen desaturation during endoscopic sedation.

Authors:  Abdul Hamid El Chafic; George Eckert; Douglas K Rex
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2012-01-24       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Experience with sedation technique for intragastric balloon placement and removal.

Authors:  Halil Coskun; Cüneyt Aksakal
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 4.129

3.  Anxiety, sedation, and simulated driving in binge drinkers.

Authors:  Elizabeth R Aston; Erin E Shannon; Anthony Liguori
Journal:  Psychol Addict Behav       Date:  2014-06

Review 4.  How best to approach endoscopic sedation?

Authors:  Michaela Müller; Till Wehrmann
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2011-07-12       Impact factor: 46.802

5.  Significant and safe shortening of the recovery time after flumazenil-reversed midazolam sedation.

Authors:  Elisabeth M H Mathus-Vliegen; Linda de Jong; Hedwig A Kos-Foekema
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-02-22       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  Practice Guidelines for Intravenous Conscious Sedation in Dentistry (Second Edition, 2017).

Authors: 
Journal:  Anesth Prog       Date:  2018

7.  Safety and effectiveness of propofol sedation during and after outpatient colonoscopy.

Authors:  Akira Horiuchi; Yoshiko Nakayama; Masashi Kajiyama; Naoyuki Kato; Tetsuya Kamijima; Yasuyuki Ichise; Naoki Tanaka
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-07-14       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Endoscopy: consensus on approving propofol sedation by nonanesthesiologists.

Authors:  Andrea Riphaus
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 46.802

9.  Propofol is a more effective and safer sedative agent than midazolam in endoscopic injection sclerotherapy for esophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Ko Watanabe; Takuto Hikichi; Tadayuki Takagi; Rei Suzuki; Jun Nakamura; Mitsuru Sugimoto; Hitomi Kikuchi; Naoki Konno; Mika Takasumi; Yuki Sato; Minami Hashimoto; Hiroki Irie; Katsutoshi Obara; Hiromasa Ohira
Journal:  Fukushima J Med Sci       Date:  2018-10-21

Review 10.  Sedation in the Endoscopy Suite.

Authors:  Katherine B Hagan; Selvi Thirumurthi; Raju Gottumukkala; John Vargo
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.