OBJECTIVES: Injection drug users (IDUs) often undergo procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) as part of emergency department (ED) treatment. We compared adverse events (AEs) using a variety of sedation regimens. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of a PSA safety audit in two urban EDs. Consecutive self-reported IDUs were identified, and structured data describing comorbidities, vital signs, sedation regimens (propofol [P], propofol-fentanyl [PF], fentanyl-midazolam [FM], ketofol [1:1 ketamine:propofol, KF], and ketamine-propofol [KP]) and AEs were collected. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each sedation group having an AE; the secondary outcome was the proportion of patients having a cardiovascular or respiratory AE. RESULTS: Data were collected on 276 IDUs (78 P, 82 PF, 65 FM, 25 KF, and 26 KP), and 18 patients had AEs (6.5%, 95% CI 4.0-10.3). The AE rates were 0.0%, 8.5%, 9.2%, 12.0%, and 7.6%, respectively, with propofol having a significantly lower rate (Pearson coefficient 14.9, p = 0.007). The cardiovascular/respiratory AE rates were significantly different as well, with P, KP, and KF having the lowest rates (Pearson coefficient 13.3, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: For IDU PSA, the overall AE rate was 6.5%, and propofol appeared to have a significantly lower rate.
OBJECTIVES: Injection drug users (IDUs) often undergo procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) as part of emergency department (ED) treatment. We compared adverse events (AEs) using a variety of sedation regimens. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of a PSA safety audit in two urban EDs. Consecutive self-reported IDUs were identified, and structured data describing comorbidities, vital signs, sedation regimens (propofol [P], propofol-fentanyl [PF], fentanyl-midazolam [FM], ketofol [1:1 ketamine:propofol, KF], and ketamine-propofol [KP]) and AEs were collected. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in each sedation group having an AE; the secondary outcome was the proportion of patients having a cardiovascular or respiratory AE. RESULTS: Data were collected on 276 IDUs (78 P, 82 PF, 65 FM, 25 KF, and 26 KP), and 18 patients had AEs (6.5%, 95% CI 4.0-10.3). The AE rates were 0.0%, 8.5%, 9.2%, 12.0%, and 7.6%, respectively, with propofol having a significantly lower rate (Pearson coefficient 14.9, p = 0.007). The cardiovascular/respiratory AE rates were significantly different as well, with P, KP, and KF having the lowest rates (Pearson coefficient 13.3, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: For IDU PSA, the overall AE rate was 6.5%, and propofol appeared to have a significantly lower rate.
Authors: M Fernanda Bellolio; Waqas I Gilani; Patricia Barrionuevo; M Hassan Murad; Patricia J Erwin; Joel R Anderson; James R Miner; Erik P Hess Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2016-01-22 Impact factor: 3.451