Search

Background and Study Aims: Balanced propofol sedation (BPS) administered by adequately trained non-anaesthesiologist personnel has gained popularity in GI endoscopy because of its shorter procedure and recovery time, high patient satisfaction, and low rate of adverse events (AEs), despite being considered controversial. We report data from an audit of endoscopist-directed (ED) nurse-administered sedation in an Italian referral hospital., Patients and Methods: Consecutive endoscopic procedures performed between 2020 and 2022 were considered. Under the guidance of the endoscopist, the nurse administered midazolam/fentanyl, followed by a progressive top-up dosage of a 10-20 mg bolus of propofol to achieve moderate to deep sedation. The endoscopists and nurses were all certified in our hospital with a continuous and scheduled training from 2006., Results: During the study period, a total of 19,407 examinations (7,803 EGDS, 10,439 colonoscopies, 77 PEG, 697 EUS, and 365 ERCP) and 14,415 patients were included. Of these, 29.4 % of patients were classified as ASA I, 66.5 % as ASA II, and 5.1 % as ASA III. Hypotension was recorded in 1,293 (6 %) examinations and bradycardia in 176 (0.9 %) patients. Eleven patients (0.06 %) had minor respiratory adverse events. Two patients (0.01 %) had major AEs requiring orotracheal intubation., Conclusions: ED-BPS is safe in low-risk patients. Major AEs occurred in 0.01 % of procedures., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest No conflict of interest, (Copyright © 2024 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Penile plication is commonly performed for Peyronie's disease under general or spinal anesthesia. Conscious sedation (CS) offers decreased anesthetic risks, cost-effectiveness, and the ability to perform the procedure in outpatient settings with shorter wait times. We sought to compare tolerability of penile plication under deep intravenous sedation (DIS) administered by anesthesiologists and nursing-administered CS (NACS)., Methods: Tolerability for penile plication was prospectively evaluated, excluding revision surgeries and those with hourglass or hinge deformities. DIS included midazolam and ketamine with infusion of propofol and remifentanil. NACS consisted of midazolam and fentanyl. Baseline characteristics, procedural information, and patient- and surgeon-reported pain assessments were collected. Patients were administered a standardized tolerability questionnaire on follow-up., Results: Forty patients were enrolled (23 DIS; 17 NACS) with similar baseline characteristics. Median curvature of the DIS cohort was 55° (interquartile range = 43.75-76.25) and 45° (interquartile range = 45-60) in NACS. There was a 100% success rate with no procedure abortion or conversion to general anesthetic. On follow-up, all patients had functional curvature (<20°), and 100% of patients in the DIS and NACS cohorts reported that they would recommend CS to others. Over 93% of patients in both cohorts would choose CS over general anesthetic in the future, with no differences in perioperative and postoperative pain between groups., Conclusions: Penile plication with CS, whether administered by an anesthesiologist or nursing, is well tolerated with no differences in pain or complications. This indicates that outpatient penile plication with trained nursing staff administering CS can safely reduce costs, risks, and wait times.

Using deep sedation, adjunct airway devices such as oral or nasal airways are frequently required to maintain airway patency. Traditional oral airways (TOAs, made of rigid plastic) or nasal airways (made of pliable materials) can be associated with adverse effects, contributing to a trend of anesthesia providers placing nasal airways orally. A clinical observational study and an electronic provider survey were conducted to examine this emerging practice. The observation study objective was to investigate reported postoperative sore throat occurrence associated with use of either a nontraditional airway (nasal airway used orally) or TOA in deep sedation procedures (N = 243). Patients receiving nontraditional airways reported significantly less postoperative sore throat than those receiving TOAs (17% vs 40%, respectively; P < .001). These results prompted a broader exploration into airway practices of anesthesia providers via an electronic survey. Most respondents (n = 293) reported adverse effects, including gagging/coughing on insertion, oral cavity injury, and bleeding with TOAs. More than half (52.8%) reported using nasal airways orally. These results suggest a clinical void in current airway management options for deep sedation. Providers indicated the need for airway devices that provide a patent airway while mitigating adverse effects associated with commonly used airways., Competing Interests: Roxanne McMurray is the inventor of the McMurray Enhanced Airway and is vice president of clinical management at McMurray Medical, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Megan McMurray is the daughter of Roxanne McMurray but has no financial ties to McMurray Medical. The other authors have no financial relationships with any commercial interest related to the content of the article. The authors did discuss off-label use within the article., (Copyright © by the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists.)

Background: Nurses are fundamental to the implementation of sedation protocols for patients receiving mechanical ventilation. A 2005 survey showed that nurses' attitudes toward sedation affected their sedation practices. Since then, updated guidelines on managing pain, agitation, and delirium have been published., Objective: To explore nurses' self-reported attitudes and practices related to sedation and determine whether they have changed in the past decade., Methods: Members of the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses were invited to complete the Nurse Sedation Practices Scale, which measures nurses' self-reported sedation practices and factors that affect them. Item and subscale responses were analyzed, and differences in item responses by respondent characteristics were determined., Results: Respondents (N = 177) were mostly staff nurses (68%) with a bachelor's degree in nursing (63%). Nurses' attitudes toward the effectiveness of sedation in relieving patients' distress during mechanical ventilation correlated positively with their intention to administer sedatives ( r s = 0.65). Sixty-six percent of nurses agreed that sedation was necessary for patients' comfort, and 34% agreed that limiting patients' recall was a desired outcome of sedation. Respondents with more experience or CCRN certification had a less positive evaluation of the effectiveness of sedation in minimizing distress., Conclusions: Nurses' attitudes toward sedating patients receiving mechanical ventilation have shifted in the past decade, with fewer nurses now believing that all patients should be sedated. However, more than half of nurses still agree that sedation is needed for patients' comfort, highlighting the need to consider nurses' attitudes when seeking to optimize sedation practices during mechanical ventilation., (© 2019 American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.)

Delirium represents a serious problem that impacts the physical and cognitive prognosis of patients admitted to intensive care units and requires prompt diagnosis and management. This article describes the case and progress of a patient placed on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation with difficult sedation criteria and an early diagnosis of mixed delirium. During the case report, we reflect on the pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies employed to cope with delirium paying special attention to the non-use of physical restraint measures in order to preserve vital support devices (endotracheal tube or Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation cannula). The multimodal and multidisciplinary approach, focused on nursing interventions, strict Pain/Agitation/Delirium monitoring and pharmacological measures, as well as the implementation of measures according to the eCASH (early Comfort using Analgesia, minimal Sedatives and maximal Human Care) concept, were effective, resulting in a relatively short admission considering the severity of the patient's condition and the associated complications. Early independent ambulation was achieved prior to transfer to a hospitalisation unit., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Currently there is a trend towards less or no use of sedation of mechanically ventilated patients. Still, little is known about how different sedation strategies affect relatives' satisfaction with the Intensive Care Unit (ICU)., Aim: To explore if there was a difference in relatives' personal reactions and the degree of satisfaction with information, communication, surroundings, care and treatment in the ICU between relatives of patients who receive no sedation compared with relatives of patients receiving sedation during mechanical ventilation in the ICU., Method: A survey study using a questionnaire with 39 questions was distributed to relatives of mechanically ventilated patients, who had been randomised to either sedation with daily wake up or no sedation., Results: Forty-nine questionnaires were sent out and 36 relatives answered. The response rate was 73%. We found no differences in relatives' personal reactions or in the degree of satisfaction with information, communication, care and treatment in the ICU between relatives of patients in the two groups. Relatives of patients treated with no sedation felt more bothered by disturbances in the surroundings compared with relatives of patients who were sedated (p=0.03)., Conclusion: Treating the patient during mechanical ventilation with no sedation does not affect relatives' satisfaction adversely., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To control the physical symptoms in end-of-life pharmacological management involves major intervention. The aim of this article is to review the relevant issues in the management of clinical nursing situation and drugs commonly used in palliative sedation in agony., Methodology: Nursing management in Palliative Sedation recommended by scientific literature search in Scopus, CINAHL, Medline-PubMed and Google Scholar, with key words "palliative sedation", "pharmacology", "nursing care" and "palliative care" are selected., Results: The goal of palliative sedation (PS) is to reduce the level of consciousness as the only way to relieve intense suffering in terminally ill patients, such as refractory delirium or dyspnea, massive bleeding, convulsive status, crackles premortem or refractory psychological suffering. The route of choice in PS is subcutaneous injection (sc). First line drugs in sedation are midazolam and levomepromazina. Opioids should be kept at equi-analgesic doses, morphine chloride being the most widely used. The fundamental role of nursing in SP is monitoring the level of sedation based on the Ramsay scale (or similar) and recognition of the indicative signs of discomfort for administration rescue sedative or analgesic medication and/or screening treatable intercurrent process (distended bladder, constipation, obstruction way, final dose effect, etc.).

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of a nurse-driven sedation protocol on the length of mechanical ventilation, total daily doses of sedatives, and complications of sedation., Design: A single-center prospective before and after study was conducted from October 2010 to December 2013., Setting: Twelve-bed surgical and medical PICU of the university-affiliated hospital in Nantes, France., Patients: A total of 235 patients, between 28 days and 18 years old, requiring mechanical ventilation for at least 24 hours were included in the study; data from 194 patients were analyzed., Interventions: During the first study phase, no protocol was used. During the second phase, patients were sedated according to a nurse-driven protocol., Measurements and Main Results: In the whole population, the length of mechanical ventilation did not differ between protocol and control groups (protocol, 4 [3-8] vs control, 5 [3-7.5]; p = 0.44). Analyzing age subgroups, the length of mechanical ventilation was significantly shorter in the protocol group than in the control group in children older than 12 months (4 [3-8] vs 5 [2.75-11.25] d; p = 0.04). Daily dose of midazolam decreased during the protocol phase compared with the control phase (1 [0.56-1.8] and 1.2 [0.85-2.4] mg/kg/d, respectively; p = 0.02). No differences were shown regarding other daily dose of drugs. In the control group, 68% of children had more than 20% of COMFORT-behavior scale assessment under the target (oversedation) versus 59% in the protocol group (p = 0.139)., Conclusions: Implementation of a nurse-driven sedation protocol in a PICU is feasible and safe, allowed a decrease in daily dose of benzodiazepines, and decreased the duration of mechanical ventilation in older patients.

Background: Mechanically ventilated patients may receive more sedation during the night than during the day, potentially delaying extubation. We compared nighttime and daytime benzodiazepine and opioid administration in adult patients enrolled in a multicenter sedation trial comparing protocolized sedation alone or protocolized sedation combined with daily sedation interruption; and we evaluated whether nighttime and daytime doses were associated with liberation from mechanical ventilation., Methods: This is a secondary analysis of a randomized trial which was conducted in 16 North American medical-surgical ICUs. In all 423 patients, nurses applied a validated sedation scale hourly to titrate benzodiazepine and opioid infusions to achieve a light level of sedation. Using fentanyl equivalents and midazolam equivalents, we compared dosages administered during night (19:00 to 07:00) and day (07:00 to 19:00) shifts. Using multivariable logistic regression we evaluated the association between nighttime and daytime opioid and sedative doses, and spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) conduct, SBT success, and extubation., Results: Nighttime benzodiazepine and opioid doses were significantly higher than daytime doses (mean difference midazolam equivalents 23.3 mg, 95 % CI 12.9, 33.8, p < 0.0001; mean difference fentanyl equivalents 356 mcg, 95 % CI 130, 582, p = 0.0021). Mean Sedation Agitation Scale score was similar between night and day, and was at target (3.2 vs 3.3, 95 % CI -0.05, 0.02, p = 0.35). Self-reported nurse workload was similar during the night and day. Patients were more often restrained during day shifts (76.3 % vs 73.7 %, p < 0.0001), and there were more unintentional device removals during the day compared with night (15.9 % vs 9.1 %, p < 0.0001). Increases in nighttime drug doses were independently associated with failure to meet SBT screening criteria, SBT failure, and the decision not to extubate the patient despite successful SBT., Conclusion: Patients received higher doses of opioids and benzodiazepines at night. Higher nighttime doses were associated with SBT failure and delayed extubation., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00675363 . Registered 7 May 2008.

Study Purpose: To determine correlation and predictive value between data obtained with the bispectral index (BIS) and diagnostic electroencephalogram (EEG) in determining degree of burst suppression during drug-induced coma. This study seeks to answer the question: "To what degree can EEG suppression and burst count as measured by diagnostic EEG during drug-induced coma be predicted from data obtained from the BIS such as BIS value, suppression ratio (SR), and burst count?", Background/significance: During drug-induced coma, cortical EEG is the gold standard for real-time monitoring and drug titration. Diagnostic EEG is, from setup through data analysis, labor intensive, costly, and difficult to maintain uniform clinician competency. BIS monitoring is less expensive, less labor-intensive, and easier to interpret data and establish/maintain competency. Validating BIS data versus diagnostic EEG facilitates effective brain monitoring during drug-induced coma at lower cost with similar outcomes., Method: This is a prospective, observational cohort study. Four consecutive patients receiving drug-induced coma/EEG monitoring were enrolled. BIS was initiated after informed consent. Variables recorded per minute included presence or absence of EEG burst suppression, burst count, BIS value over time, burst count, and SR. Pearson's product-moment and Spearman rank coefficient for BIS value and SR versus burst count were performed. Regression analysis was utilized to plot BIS values versus bursts/minute on EEG as well as SR versus burst count on EEG. EEG/BIS data were collected from digital data files and transcribed onto data sheets for corresponding time indices., Results: Four patients yielded 1,972 data sets over 33 hours of EEG/BIS monitoring. Regression coefficient of 0.6673 shows robust predictive value between EEG burst count and BIS SR. Spearman rank coefficient of -0.8727 indicates strong inverse correlation between EEG burst count and BIS SR. Pearson's correlation coefficient between EEG versus BIS burst count was .8256 indicating strong positive correlation. Spearman's rank coefficient of 0.8810 and Pearson's correlation coefficient of .6819 showed strong correlation between BIS value versus EEG burst count. Number of patients (4) limits available statistics and ability to generalize results. Graphs and statistics show strong correlation/predictive value for BIS parameters to EEG suppression., Conclusions: This study is the first to measure correlation and predictive value between BIS monitoring and diagnostic EEG for degree of EEG suppression and burst count in the adult population. Available statistic tests and graphing of variables from BIS and diagnostic EEG show strong correlation and predictive value between both monitoring technologies during drug-induced coma. These support using BIS value, SR, and burst count to predict degree of EEG suppression in real time for titrating metabolic suppression therapy.

Introduction: Non-anaesthesiologist-administered propofol sedation (NAPS/NAAP) is increasingly used in many countries. Most regimens aim for light or moderate sedation. Little evidence on safety of deep NAPS sedation is available. The aim of this study was to explore the safety of intermittent deep sedation with NAPS in patients undergoing gastroenterologic endoscopic procedures., Methods: This was a retrospective case-control study. All patients sedated with NAPS for colonoscopies, sigmoidoscopies and oesophagogastroduodenoscopies from May 2007 through December 2012 were included. Cases were defined as patients developing an adverse event (oxygen saturation < 92%, a drop in mean arterial pressure of > 30% or a drop in systolic blood pressure of > 50 mmHg). The remaining patients served as controls., Results: A total of 6,840 consecutive patients undergoing 7,364 procedures were included. The mean propofol dose was 331.6 mg (standard deviation = 179.4 mg). The overall rate of hypoxia was 3.2%, and the rate of hypotension was 3.1%. Assisted ventilation was needed in 0.5%. Age (p < 0.001), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class 3 (p = 0.017) and total propofol dose (p = 0.001) were associated with a higher rate of adverse events., Conclusion: Safety during intermittent deep sedation with NAPS was good. Age, ASA class 3 and total propofol dose were correlated with a higher rate of adverse events. Patients aged 60 years or more needed more handling during adverse events., Funding: Arvid Nilsson's Foundation provided funding for this study. The founders did not have any influence on the design or the presentation of the study., Trial Registration: not relevant.

OBJECTIVE. Standard benzodiazepine/opioid cocktail has proven inferior to propofol sedation during complicated endoscopic procedures and in low-tolerance patients. Propofol is a short-acting hypnotic with a potential risk of respiratory depression at levels of moderate to deep sedation. The existing literature on capnography for endoscopy patients sedated with nurse-administered propofol sedation (NAPS) is limited. Can the addition of capnography to standard monitoring during endoscopy with NAPS reduce the number, duration, and level of hypoxia. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This study was a randomized controlled trial with an intervention group (capnography) and a control group (without capnography). Eligible subjects were consecutive patients for endoscopy at Gentofte Hospital compliant with the criteria of NAPS. RESULTS. Five hundred and forty patients, 263 with capnography and 277 without capnography, were included in the analysis. The number and total duration of hypoxia was reduced by 39.3% and 21.1% in the intervention group compared to the control group (p > 0.05). No differences in actions taken against insufficient respiration were found. Changes in end-tidal carbon dioxide (R = 0.177, p-value < 0.001) and respiratory rate (R = 0.092, p-value < 0.001) were correlated to oxygen saturation (SpO2) up to 36 s prior to changes in SpO2. CONCLUSIONS. Capnography seems to reduce the number and duration of hypoxia in NAPS patients (p > 0.05). Capnography is able to detect insufficient respiration that may lead to hypoxia prior to changes in pulse oximetry. However, due to a limited clinical benefit and additional costs associated with capnography, we do not find capnography necessary during the use of NAPS.

Objective: To describe and analyze the development and psychometric properties of subjective sedation scales developed for critically ill adult patients., Data Sources: PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and the International Pharmaceutical Abstracts., Study Selection: English-only publications through December 2012 with at least 30 patients older than 18 years, which included the key words of adult, critically ill, subjective sedation scale, sedation scale, validity, and reliability., Data Extraction: Two independent reviewers evaluated the psychometric properties using a standardized sedation scale psychometric scoring system., Data Synthesis: Among the 19,000+ citations extracted for the 2013 Society of Critical Care Medicine's Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pain, Agitation and Delirium and from December 2010 to 2012, 36 articles were identified compassing 11 sedation scales. The scale development process, psychometric properties, feasibility, and implementation of sedation scales were analyzed using a 0-20 scoring system. Two scales demonstrated scores indicating "very good" published psychometric properties: Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (19.5) and the Sedation-Agitation Scale (19). Scores with "moderate" properties include the Vancouver Interaction and Calmness Scale (14.3), Adaptation to the Intensive Care Environment (13.7), Ramsay Sedation Scale (13.2), Minnesota Sedation Assessment Tool (13), and the Nursing Instrument for the Communication of Sedation (12.8). Scales with "low" properties included the Motor Activity Assessment Scale (11.5) and the Sedation Intensive Care Score (10.5). The New Sheffield Sedation Scale (8.5) and the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (3.7) demonstrated "very low" published properties., Conclusions: Based on the current literature, and using a predetermined psychometric scoring system, the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and the Sedation-Agitation Scale are the most valid and reliable subjective sedation scales for use in critically ill adult patients.

Background: Side effects of the medications used for procedural sedation and analgesia in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory are known to cause impaired respiratory function. Impaired respiratory function poses considerable risk to patient safety as it can lead to inadequate oxygenation. Having knowledge about the conditions that predict impaired respiratory function prior to the procedure would enable nurses to identify at-risk patients and selectively implement intensive respiratory monitoring. This would reduce the possibility of inadequate oxygenation occurring., Aim: To identify pre-procedure risk factors for impaired respiratory function during nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory., Design: Retrospective matched case-control., Methods: 21 cases of impaired respiratory function were identified and matched to 113 controls from a consecutive cohort of patients over 18 years of age. Conditional logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for impaired respiratory function., Results: With each additional indicator of acute illness, case patients were nearly two times more likely than their controls to experience impaired respiratory function (OR 1.78; 95% CI 1.19-2.67; p = 0.005). Indicators of acute illness included emergency admission, being transferred from a critical care unit for the procedure or requiring respiratory or haemodynamic support in the lead up to the procedure., Conclusion: Several factors that predict the likelihood of impaired respiratory function were identified. The results from this study could be used to inform prospective studies investigating the effectiveness of interventions for impaired respiratory function during nurse-administered procedural sedation and analgesia in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory.

Background and Aims: A trend towards lighter sedation has been evident in many intensive care units (ICUs). The aims of the survey were to describe sedation practice in European ICUs and to compare sedation practice in Nordic and non-Nordic countries., Design and Methods: A cross-sectional survey of ICU nurses attending the fourth European federation of Critical Care Nursing associations (EfCCNa) in Denmark, 2011. Data included use of protocols; sedation, pain and delirium assessment tools; collaborative decision-making; sedation and analgesic medications; and educational preparation related to sedation., Results: Response rate was 42% (n = 291) from 22 countries where 53% (n = 148) used sedation protocols. Nordic nurses reported greater use of sedation (91% versus 67%, p < 0·01) and pain (91% versus 69%, p < 0·01) assessment tools than non-Nordic nurses. Decision-making on sedation was more inter-professionally collaborative in Nordic ICUs (83% versus 61%, p < 0·01), units were smaller (10 versus 15 beds, p < 0·01) and nurse-patient ratio was higher (1:1, 75% versus 26%, p < 0·01). Nordic nurses reported greater consistency in maintaining circadian rhythm (66% versus 49%, p < 0·01), less use of physical restraints (14% versus 36%, p < 0·01), less use of neuromuscular blocking agents (3% versus 16%, p < 0·01), and received more sedation education (92% versus 76%, p < 0·01). Delirium assessment was not performed systematically in most settings., Conclusions: Organizational and contextual factors, such as ICU size, staffing ratio and inter-professional collaboration, are contributing factors to sedation management in European ICUs. The Nordic context might be more germane to the goal of lighter sedation and better pain management., Relevance to Clinical Practice: Our study raises awareness of current sedation practice, paving the way towards optimized ICU sedation management., (© 2013 The Authors. Nursing in Critical Care © 2013 British Association of Critical Care Nurses.)

Aim: To determine whether bispectral index (BIS) monitoring is useful for propofol administration for deep sedation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)., Methods: Fifty-nine consecutive patients with a variety of reasons for ERCP who underwent the procedure at least twice between 1 July 2010 and 30 November 2010. This was a randomized cross-over study, in which each patient underwent ERCP twice, once with BIS monitoring and once with control monitoring. Whether BIS monitoring was done during the first or second ERCP procedure was random. Patients were intermittently administered a mixed regimen including midazolam, pethidine, and propofol by trained nurses. The nurse used a routine practice to monitor sedation using the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (MOAA/S) scale or the BIS monitoring. The total amount of midazolam and propofol used and serious side effects were compared between the BIS and control groups., Results: The mean total propofol dose administered was 53.1 ± 32.2 mg in the BIS group and 54.9 ± 30.8 mg in the control group (P = 0.673). The individual propofol dose received per minute during the ERCP procedure was 2.90 ± 1.83 mg/min in the BIS group and 3.44 ± 2.04 mg in the control group (P = 0.103). The median value of the MOAA/S score during the maintenance phase of sedation was comparable for the two groups. The mean BIS values throughout the procedure (from insertion to removal of the endoscope) were 76.5 ± 8.7 for all 59 patients in using the BIS monitor. No significant differences in the frequency of < 80% oxygen saturation, hypotension (< 80 mmHg), or bradycardia (< 50 beats/min) were observed between the two study groups. Four cases of poor cooperation occurred, in which the procedure should be stopped to add the propofol dose. After adding the propofol, the procedure could be conducted successfully (one case in the BIS group, three cases in the control group). The endoscopist rated patient sedation as excellent for all patients in both groups. All patients in both groups rated their level of satisfaction as high (no discomfort). During the post-procedural follow-up in the recovery area, no cases of clinically significant hypoxic episodes were recorded in either group. No other postoperative side effects related to sedation were observed in either group., Conclusion: BIS monitoring trend to slighlty reduce the mean propofol dose. Nurse-administered propofol sedation under the supervision of a gastroenterologist may be considered an alternative under anesthesiologist.

Introduction: This study provides an evaluation and risk analysis of propofol sedation for endoscopic pulmonary procedures according to our unit's "gastroenterologic nurse-administered propofol sedation (NAPS) guideline"., Material and Methods: The present study is a prospective descriptive study performed at the Endoscopy Unit, Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen, from May to July 2009. The study comprised at total of 51 consecutive patients who underwent 77 endoscopic procedures. Only patients above the age of 16 years were eligible for treatment. The exclusion criteria were as follows: American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class > 3, history of sedation-related complications, severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Excluded were patients with a potentially difficult airway and ventricular retention. Data on the number and type of procedure, baseline characteristics, sedation time, propofol dose administered and adverse events were obtained from medical histories., Results: A total of 23 cases of adverse events were recorded, including one event of hypotension and 22 events of hypoxaemia. Five patients needed assisted ventilation. The frequency of hypoxaemia in sessions involving bronchoscopy was 17 of 26 (65%) compared with transoesophageal endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) (17 of 45, 35%) and endoscopic bronchial ultrasound (EBUS) (three of six, 50%). Endoscopist assessment of working conditions was good and patient assessment of discomfort was low. No patients required endotracheal intubation and there was no mortality., Conclusion: This study supports the conclusion that propofol administered by nurses provides for good working conditions and satisfied patients. But our "NAPS for endoscopic gastroenterologic procedures" guideline was unsuited for endoscopic pulmonary procedures including EUS., Funding: This work was supported by the START research foundation at Gentofte Hospital., Trial Registration: not relevant.

Analgesics and sedatives are commonly prescribed in the ICU environment for patient comfort, however, recent studies have shown that these medications can themselves lead to adverse patient outcomes. Interventions that facilitate a total dose reduction in analgesic and sedative medications e.g. the use of nurse controlled protocol guided sedation, the combination of spontaneous awakening and breathing trials, and the use of short acting medications, are associated with improved outcomes such as decreased time of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay. This purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the pharmacology of commonly prescribed analgesics and sedatives, and to discuss the evidence regarding best prescribing practices of these medications, to facilitate early liberation from mechanical ventilation and to promote animation in critically ill patients.

Introduction: Proper training to improve safety of NAPS (nurse-administered propofol sedation) is essential., Objective: To communicate our experience with a training program of NAPS., Materials and Methods: In 2007, a training program was introduced for endoscopists and endoscopy nurses in collaboration with the Department of Anaesthesiology. During a 2.5-year period, eight nurses were trained. Propofol was given as monotherapy. The training program for nurses consisted of a 6-week course including theoretical and practical training whereas the training program for endoscopists consisted of 2.5 h of theory. Patients were selected based on strict criteria including patients in ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) group I-III., Results: 2527 patients undergoing 2.656 gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures were included. The patients were ASA group I, II and III in 34.7%, 56% and 9,3%, respectively. Median dose of propofol was 300 mg. No mortality was noted. 119 of 2527 patients developed short lasting hypoxia (4.7%); 61 (2.4%) needed suction; 22 (0.9%) required bag-mask ventilation and 8 (0.3%) procedures had to be discontinued. In 11 patients (0.4%), anesthetic assistance was called due to short lasting desaturation. 34 patients (1.3%) experienced a change in blood pressure greater than 30%., Conclusion: NAPS provided by properly trained nurses according to the present protocol is safe and only associated with a minor risk (short lasting hypoxia 4.7%). National or international structured training programs are at present few or non-existing. The present training program has documented its value and is suggested as the basis for the current development of guidelines.

Background and Study Aims: The aim of the present study was to perform a risk analysis during the implementation phase of nurse-administered propofol sedation (NAPS) and to validate our structured training program., Patients and Methods: A structured training program was developed both for endoscopists and for endoscopy nurses who were administering propofol sedation. The nurses' program comprised a 6-week course including theoretical and practical training in airway management, and the endoscopists' program consisted of 2.5 h of theory and a short course in practical airway management. In the implementation phase, data from 1822 endoscopic procedures in 1764 patients were prospectively collected. All adverse events related to sedation were recorded (defined as oxygen saturation < 92%, airway handling, assisted ventilation, need for intubation, change in blood pressure > 20 mmHg)., Results: 78 cases of hypoxemia were documented in 1764 patients (4.4%), in 56/983 upper endoscopies (5.7%) and 22/754 lower endoscopies (2.9%) (P = 0.007). Assisted ventilation was necessary in 19 cases (1.1%) and anesthesiologic assistance was requested 10 times. Two patients required endotracheal intubation. A change in blood pressure was recorded in 451 patients (26%). Independent risk factors were type of intervention and level of experience of the staff performing the sedation., Conclusion: These results were obtained after development of a structured training program both for endoscopists and nurses using propofol for sedation, and can be used as basis for further comparison. NAPS for endoscopic procedures is safe when performed by personnel properly trained in airway handling and sedation with propofol, and has considerable advantages compared with conventional sedation for endoscopy., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Aim: This paper is a report of a nationwide study conducted to assess experiences of nurses involved in palliative sedation at home after introduction of a physicians' guideline for palliative sedation., Background: Most studies investigating the practice of palliative sedation focus on physicians' practices and attitudes. However, little is known about experiences and attitudes of nurses., Methods: A web-based structured questionnaire was offered to 387 nurses providing medical technical care in 2007, assessing their experiences concerning decision-making, treatment policy and communication, focussing on the last patient receiving palliative sedation., Results: The questionnaire was filled out by 201 nurses (response rate 52%). The majority of respondents agreed with the indication for palliative sedation. However, 21% reported to have refused carrying out a palliative sedation in the preceding year. The general practitioner was not present at the start of palliative sedation in a third of the cases, but was available when needed. The sedation was considered insufficiently effective by 42% of the respondents. According to a third of the respondents, the level of sedation was not related to the required level of symptom relief nor were changes in dosage based on the severity of symptoms., Conclusion: Although the guideline for palliative sedation appears to be followed adequately in the majority of cases with respect to indication for palliative sedation and reportage. The survey findings revealed shortcomings in medication policy, communication, medical control over the start and continued monitoring of palliative sedation., (© 2011 The Authors. Journal of Advanced Nursing © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Objective: To report on the creation and development of an interdisciplinary anesthesiology and nursing team to provide anesthesia outside the operating room., Material and Methods: We describe the creation of an interdisciplinary team and preanesthesia evaluation protocols for using nurses specializing in anesthesia for procedures outside the operating room. We analyzed the anesthetic procedures performed outside the operating room, the rate of suspensions due to failure of the procedure, and their impact on the rate of associated complications, from October 2006 to October 2007., Results: Since the start of the project, 586 procedures outside the operating room have been performed. No suspensions or delays were observed that were due to comorbidity not detected in the preanesthesia evaluation carried out by the nurses. The incidences of complications and inadequate sedations were comparable to those reported for other similar interdisciplinary groups in this area., Conclusions: The creation of an interdisciplinary team of anesthesiologists and specialized nurses for providing anesthesia outside the operating room optimizes resources and improves routine clinical practice. It has allowed for universal preanesthesia evaluation, improved the distribution of resources, and proven a stimulus to the care-giving process.