Literature DB >> 24859263

Provision of deep procedural sedation by a pediatric sedation team at a freestanding imaging center.

Elizabeth T Emrath1, Jana A Stockwell, Courtney E McCracken, Harold K Simon, Pradip P Kamat.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Freestanding imaging centers are popular options for health care systems to offer services accessible to local communities. The provision of deep sedation at these centers could allow for flexibility in scheduling imaging for pediatric patients. Our Children's Sedation Services group, comprised of pediatric critical care medicine and pediatric emergency medicine physicians, has supplied such a service for 5 years. However, limited description of such off-site services exists. The site has resuscitation equipment and medications, yet limited staffing and no proximity to hospital support.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the experience of a cohort of pediatric patients undergoing sedation at a freestanding imaging center.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all sedations from January 2012 to December 2012. Study variables include general demographics, length of sedation, type of imaging, medications used, completion of imaging, adverse events based on those defined by the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium database and need for transfer to a hospital for additional care.
RESULTS: Six hundred fifty-four consecutive sedations were analyzed. Most patients were low acuity American Society of Anesthesiologists physical class ≤ 2 (91.8%). Mean sedation time was 55 min (SD ± 24). The overwhelming majority of patients (95.7%) were sedated for MRI, 3.8% for CT and <1% (three patients) for both modalities. Propofol was used in 98% of cases. Overall, 267 events requiring intervention occurred in 164 patient encounters (25.1%). However, after adjustment for changes from expected physiological response to the sedative, the rate of events was 10.2%. Seventy-five (11.5%) patients had desaturation requiring supplemental oxygen, nasopharyngeal tube or oral airway placement, continuous positive airway pressure or brief bag valve mask ventilation. Eleven (1.7%) had apnea requiring continuous positive airway pressure or bag valve mask ventilation briefly. One patient had bradycardia that resolved with nasopharyngeal tube placement and continuous positive airway pressure. Fifteen (2.3%) patients had hypotension requiring adjustment of the sedation drip but no fluid bolus. Overall, there were six failed sedations (0.9%), defined by the inability to complete the imaging study. There were no serious adverse events. There were no episodes of cardiac arrest or need for intubation. No patient required transfer to a hospital.
CONCLUSION: Sedation provided at this freestanding imaging center resulted in no serious adverse events and few failed sedations. While this represents a limited cohort with sedations performed by predominately pediatric critical care medicine and pediatric emergency medicine physicians, these findings have implications for the design and potential scope of practice of outpatient pediatric sedation services to support community-based pediatric imaging.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24859263     DOI: 10.1007/s00247-014-2942-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Radiol        ISSN: 0301-0449


  18 in total

1.  Procedural sedation and implications for quality and risk management.

Authors:  Mary T Antonelli; David Seaver; Richard D Urman
Journal:  J Healthc Risk Manag       Date:  2013

2.  Who owns deep sedation?

Authors:  Steven M Green; Baruch Krauss
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2011-03-27       Impact factor: 5.721

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

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

4.  Adverse sedation events in pediatrics: analysis of medications used for sedation.

Authors:  C J Coté; H W Karl; D A Notterman; J A Weinberg; C McCloskey
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 7.124

5.  Adverse events and risk factors associated with the sedation of children by nonanesthesiologists.

Authors:  S Malviya; T Voepel-Lewis; A R Tait
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 5.108

6.  The pediatric sedation unit: a mechanism for pediatric sedation.

Authors:  L Lowrie; A H Weiss; C Lacombe
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 7.124

7.  Pediatric procedural sedation by a dedicated nonanesthesiology pediatric sedation service using propofol.

Authors:  Kalpesh N Patel; Harold K Simon; Christina A Stockwell; Jana A Stockwell; Michael A DeGuzman; Pei-Ling Roerig; Mark R Rigby
Journal:  Pediatr Emerg Care       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 1.454

8.  The incidence and nature of adverse events during pediatric sedation/anesthesia with propofol for procedures outside the operating room: a report from the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium.

Authors:  Joseph P Cravero; Michael L Beach; George T Blike; Susan M Gallagher; James H Hertzog
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 5.108

9.  Safety of propofol sedation for pediatric outpatient procedures.

Authors:  Reagan Larsen; David Galloway; Sheetal Wadera; Dean Kjar; David Hardy; Curtis Mirkes; Lori Wick; John F Pohl
Journal:  Clin Pediatr (Phila)       Date:  2009-05-29       Impact factor: 1.168

10.  Is procedural sedation with propofol acceptable for complex imaging? A comparison of short vs. prolonged sedations in children.

Authors:  Mark A Griffiths; Pradip P Kamat; Courtney E McCracken; Harold K Simon
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2013-05-07
View more
  5 in total

1.  3-D cardiac MRI in free-breathing newborns and infants: when is respiratory gating necessary?

Authors:  Achim Seeger; Patrick Krumm; Andreas Hornung; Jürgen F Schäfer; Ulrich Kramer; Ludger Sieverding
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2015-04-23

2.  Experience with the use of propofol for radiologic imaging in infants younger than 6 months of age.

Authors:  Elan Jenkins; Kiran B Hebbar; Katie K Karaga; Daniel A Hirsh; James D Fortenberry; Courtney E McCracken; Stephen F Simoneaux; Michael D Mallory; Pradip P Kamat
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2017-05-09

3.  Differences in Pediatric Non-Interventional Radiology Procedural Sedation Practices and Adverse Events by Registered Nurses and Physicians.

Authors:  Nancy Crego; Marianne Baernholdt; Elizabeth Merwin
Journal:  J Pediatr Nurs       Date:  2016-10-04       Impact factor: 2.145

4.  Risk factors for overnight respiratory events following sedation for magnetic resonance imaging in children with sleep apnea.

Authors:  Margaret J Trost; Melissa Cowell; Jennifer Cannon; Kendra Mitchell; Kevin Waloff; Humberto Avila; Sanjay Chand; Christopher J Russell
Journal:  Sleep Breath       Date:  2016-09-28       Impact factor: 2.816

Review 5.  Safety challenges related to the use of sedation and general anesthesia in pediatric patients undergoing magnetic resonance imaging examinations.

Authors:  Maddy Artunduaga; C Amber Liu; Cara E Morin; Suraj D Serai; Unni Udayasankar; Mary-Louise C Greer; Michael S Gee
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2021-04-16
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.