Literature DB >> 8214694

Adverse events in a multicenter phase IV study of propofol: evaluation by anesthesiologists and postanesthesia care unit nurses.

C H McLeskey1, C A Walawander, M L Nahrwold, M F Roizen, T H Stanley, R A Thisted, P F White, J L Apfelbaum, T H Grasela, C C Hug.   

Abstract

Phase II and III studies are tightly controlled trials investigating adverse effects before government approval of a new drug. However, because postapproval Phase IV studies involve a much larger and more complex population, the true nature of adverse effects can be seen. We analyzed Phase IV data for the new drug propofol with regard to the incidence of adverse events, and evaluations of such events by anesthesiologists versus postanesthesia care unit (PACU) nurses. Data pertained to 25,981 patients, 1722 institutions, and 1819 anesthesiologists giving propofol in three anesthetic regimens. Inclusion criteria were liberal: age, 18-80 yr; ASA physical status I-III; no continuing pregnancy; and no prior adverse anesthetic experience. Anesthesiologists and PACU nurses used data collection forms to record demographic, perioperative, and outcome variables; to evaluate recovery (excellent, good, or poor); and to describe adverse events. Adverse events were reported for 2813 patients (10.8%); the most common events were pain on injection (5.2%), hypotension (1.1%), nausea/vomiting (1.9%), and excitement (1.3%). The incidences of pain on injection and nausea/vomiting were approximately one-half and one-fifth, respectively, the values reported in earlier studies. Six hundred thirty-three patients (2.4%) had a "poor" recovery according to one or both of the evaluators (the anesthesiologist or PACU nurse). The PACU nurse was more influenced by nausea, vomiting, or postoperative pain; and the anesthesiologist was more influenced by postoperative confusion or delayed emergence from anesthesia. For only 0.6% of patients did both evaluators rate recovery as poor. Anesthesiologists gave more weight to intraoperative adverse events, and nurses to postoperative events.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8214694

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Analg        ISSN: 0003-2999            Impact factor:   5.108


  6 in total

1.  [Total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil. Results of a multicenter study of 6,161 patients].

Authors:  J Schmidt; W Hering; S Albrecht
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 1.041

2.  Combining ketamine and propofol ("ketofol") for emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia: a review.

Authors:  Sanjay Arora
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2008-01

Review 3.  [Total intravenous anesthesia. On the way to standard practice in pediatrics].

Authors:  J M Strauss; J Giest
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 4.  Propofol. An update of its use in anaesthesia and conscious sedation.

Authors:  H M Bryson; B R Fulton; D Faulds
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 9.546

5.  Effects of the addition of low-dose ketamine to propofol anesthesia in the dental procedure for intellectually disabled patients.

Authors:  Akira Hirayama; Ken-Ichi Fukuda; Yoshihiko Koukita; Tatsuya Ichinohe
Journal:  J Dent Anesth Pain Med       Date:  2019-06-30

6.  Sedation Effects Produced by a Ciprofol Initial Infusion or Bolus Dose Followed by Continuous Maintenance Infusion in Healthy Subjects: A Phase 1 Trial.

Authors:  Chao Hu; Xiaofeng Ou; Yi Teng; Shiqing Shu; Ying Wang; Xiaohong Zhu; Yan Kang; Jia Miao
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 3.845

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.