Depth of anaesthesia monitoring during procedural sedation and analgesia: A systematic review protocol

Background Procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) is used to attenuate the pain and distress that may otherwise be experienced during diagnostic and interventional medical or dental procedures. As the risk of adverse events increases with the depth of sedation induced, frequent monitoring of level of consciousness is recommended. Level of consciousness is usually monitored during PSA with clinical observation. Processed electroencephalogram-based depth of anaesthesia (DoA) monitoring devices provide an alternative method to monitor level of consciousness that can be used in addition to clinical observation. However, there is uncertainty as to whether their routine use in PSA would be justified. Rigorous evaluation of the clinical benefits of DoA monitors during PSA, including comprehensive syntheses of the available evidence, is therefore required. One potential clinical benefit of using DoA monitoring during PSA is that the technology could improve patient safety by reducing sedation-related adverse events, such as death or permanent neurological disability. We hypothesise that earlier identification of lapses into deeper than intended levels of sedation using DoA monitoring leads to more effective titration of sedative and analgesic medications, and results in a reduction in the risk of adverse events caused by the consequences of over-sedation, such as hypoxaemia. The primary objective of this review is to determine whether using DoA monitoring during PSA in the hospital setting improves patient safety by reducing the risk of hypoxaemia (defined as an arterial partial pressure of oxygen below 60 mmHg or percentage of haemoglobin that is saturated with oxygen [SpO2] less than 90 %). Other potential clinical benefits of using DoA monitoring devices during sedation will be assessed as secondary outcomes. Methods/design Electronic databases will be systematically searched for randomized controlled trials comparing the use of depth of anaesthesia monitoring devices with clinical observation of level of consciousness during PSA. Language restrictions will not be imposed. Screening, study selection and data extraction will be performed by two independent reviewers. Disagreements will be resolved by discussion. Meta-analyses will be performed if suitable. Discussion This review will synthesise the evidence on an important potential clinical benefit of DoA monitoring during PSA within hospital settings.

Inadvertent hypothermia after procedural sedation and analgesia in a cardiac catheterisation laboratory: A prospective observational study

Objective To identify the prevalence of and risk factors for inadvertent hypothermia after procedures performed with procedural sedation and analgesia in a cardiac catheterisation laboratory. Design Single-centre, prospective observational study. Setting Tertiary care private hospital in Australia. Participants A convenience sample of 399 patients undergoing elective procedures with procedural sedation and analgesia were included. Propofol infusions were used when an anaesthetist was present. Otherwise, bolus doses of either midazolam or fentanyl or a combination of these medications was used. Interventions None Measurements and main results Hypothermia was defined as a temperature <36.0° Celsius. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify risk factors. Hypothermia was present after 23.3% (n=93; 95% confidence interval [CI] 19.2%-27.4%) of 399 procedures. Sedative regimens with the highest prevalence of hypothermia were any regimen that included propofol (n=35; 40.2%; 95% CI 29.9%-50.5%) and the use of fentanyl combined with midazolam (n=23; 20.3%; 95% CI 12.9%-27.7%). Difference in mean temperature from pre to post-procedure was -0.27°C (Standard deviation [SD] 0.45). Receiving propofol (odds ratio [OR] OR 4.6 95% CI 2.5-8.6), percutaneous coronary intervention (OR 3.2 95% CI 1.7-5.9), body mass index <25 (OR 2.5 95% CI 1.4-4.4) and being hypothermic prior to the procedure (OR 4.9; 95% CI 2.3-10.8) were independent predictors of post-procedural hypothermia. Conclusions A moderate prevalence of hypothermia was observed. The small absolute change in temperature observed may not be a clinically important amount. More research is needed to increase confidence in our estimates of hypothermia in sedated patients and its impact on clinical outcomes.

Capnography monitoring during procedural sedation and analgesia: A systematic review protocol

Background An important potential clinical benefit of using capnography monitoring during procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) is that this technology could improve patient safety by reducing serious sedation-related adverse events, such as death or permanent neurological disability, which are caused by inadequate oxygenation. The hypothesis is that earlier identification of respiratory depression using capnography leads to a change in clinical management that prevents hypoxaemia. As inadequate oxygenation/ventilation is the most common reason for injury associated with PSA, reducing episodes of hypoxaemia would indicate that using capnography would be safer than relying on standard monitoring alone. Methods/design The primary objective of this review is to determine whether using capnography during PSA in the hospital setting improves patient safety by reducing the risk of hypoxaemia (defined as an arterial partial pressure of oxygen below 60 mmHg or percentage of haemoglobin that is saturated with oxygen [SpO2] less than 90 %). A secondary objective of this review is to determine whether changes in the clinical management of sedated patients are the mediating factor for any observed impact of capnography monitoring on the rate of hypoxaemia. The potential adverse effect of capnography monitoring that will be examined in this review is the rate of inadequate sedation. Electronic databases will be searched for parallel, crossover and cluster randomised controlled trials comparing the use of capnography with standard monitoring alone during PSA that is administered in the hospital setting. Studies that included patients who received general or regional anaesthesia will be excluded from the review. Non-randomised studies will be excluded. Screening, study selection and data extraction will be performed by two reviewers. The Cochrane risk of bias tool will be used to assign a judgment about the degree of risk. Meta-analyses will be performed if suitable. Discussion This review will synthesise the evidence on an important potential clinical benefit of capnography monitoring during PSA within hospital settings. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42015023740

A systematic review of capnography for sedation

We included six trials with 2524 participants. Capnography reduced hypoxaemic episodes, relative risk (95% CI) 0.71 (0.56-0.91), but the quality of evidence was poor due to high risks of performance bias and detection bias and substantial statistical heterogeneity. The reduction in hypoxaemic episodes was statistically homogeneous in the subgroup of three trials of 1823 adults sedated for colonoscopy, relative risk (95% CI) 0.59 (0.48-0.73), although the risks of performance and detection biases were high. There was no evidence that capnography affected other outcomes, including assisted ventilation, relative risk (95% CI) 0.58 (0.26-1.27), p = 0.17.

Development of process control methodology for tracking the quality and safety of pain, agitation and sedation management in critical care units

Objective: To develop sedation, pain, and agitation quality measures using process control methodology and evaluate their properties in clinical practice. Design: A Sedation Quality Assessment Tool was developed and validated to capture data for 12-hour periods of nursing care. Domains included pain/discomfort and sedation-agitation behaviors; sedative, analgesic, and neuromuscular blocking drug administration; ventilation status; and conditions potentially justifying deep sedation. Predefined sedation-related adverse events were recorded daily. Using an iterative process, algorithms were developed to describe the proportion of care periods with poor limb relaxation, poor ventilator synchronization, unnecessary deep sedation, agitation, and an overall optimum sedation metric. Proportion charts described processes over time (2 monthly intervals) for each ICU. The numbers of patients treated between sedation-related adverse events were described with G charts. Automated algorithms generated charts for 12 months of sequential data. Mean values for each process were calculated, and variation within and between ICUs explored qualitatively. Setting: Eight Scottish ICUs over a 12-month period. Patients: Mechanically ventilated patients. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: The Sedation Quality Assessment Tool agitation-sedation domains correlated with the Richmond Sedation Agitation Scale score (Spearman [rho] = 0.75) and were reliable in clinician-clinician (weighted kappa; [kappa] = 0.66) and clinician-researcher ([kappa] = 0.82) comparisons. The limb movement domain had fair correlation with Behavioral Pain Scale ([rho] = 0.24) and was reliable in clinician-clinician ([kappa] = 0.58) and clinician-researcher ([kappa] = 0.45) comparisons. Ventilator synchronization correlated with Behavioral Pain Scale ([rho] = 0.54), and reliability in clinician-clinician ([kappa] = 0.29) and clinician-researcher ([kappa] = 0.42) comparisons was fair-moderate. Eight hundred twenty-five patients were enrolled (range, 59-235 across ICUs), providing 12,385 care periods for evaluation (range 655-3,481 across ICUs). The mean proportion of care periods with each quality metric varied between ICUs: excessive sedation 12-38%; agitation 4-17%; poor relaxation 13-21%; poor ventilator synchronization 8-17%; and overall optimum sedation 45-70%. Mean adverse event intervals ranged from 1.5 to 10.3 patients treated. The quality measures appeared relatively stable during the observation period. Conclusions: Process control methodology can be used to simultaneously monitor multiple aspects of pain-sedation-agitation management within ICUs. Variation within and between ICUs could be used as triggers to explore practice variation, improve quality, and monitor this over time

The Principle of Double Effect and Terminal Sedation

Williams, Glenys, 'The Principle of Double Effect and Terminal Sedation', Medical Law Review, 9 (2001), pp.41-53 RAE2008

Patient anxiety and IV sedation in Northern Ireland

Background In recent years there has been an increase in the provision of conscious sedation, which is said to be a safe and effective means of managing the anxious patient. However, there are no guidelines to aid the dental practitioner in assessing the patient's need for sedation based on their level of anxiety.

Aims and methods The present study investigated the importance of patient anxiety as an indicator for IV sedation, using focus groups to inform the development of narrative vignettes. Ninety-nine practitioners responded to a series of scenarios to determine whether the level of patient anxiety and the patient's demand for IV sedation influenced their decision making.

Results Level of dental anxiety had a stronger influence on the clinician's decision making than patient demand, with increasing levels of dental anxiety being positively associated with the likelihood of clinicians indicating a need for IV patient sedation and also, the likelihood of clinicians providing IV sedation to these patients. Only 14% (n = 14) of respondents reported formally assessing dental anxiety.

Conclusions While dental anxiety is considered to be a key factor in determining the need for IV sedation, there is a lack of guidance regarding the assessment of anxiety among patients.

A study of patient attitudes towards fasting prior to intravenous sedation for dental treatment in a dental hospital department

INTRODUCTION: Intravenous sedation is the most commonly used method of sedation for the provision of adult dental care. However, disparity exists in pre-operative fasting times in use for patients throughout the United Kingdom.

AIMS: The aims of the study were to obtain information on the effects of existing extended pre-operative fasting regimens, to canvas patient opinions on the fasting process, and to record their positive and negative experiences associated with it.

METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional descriptive study using survey methodology was conducted of adult patients attending a dental hospital for operative treatment under intravenous sedation. Sixty-four questionnaires were distributed over a four-month period, beginning 2nd October 2007.

RESULTS: The surveyed patient pool consisted of 38 females and 14 males with a mean age of 32.4 years. The response rate achieved was 81.2%. Seventy-one per cent of patients indicated that normally they consumed something for breakfast, the most common items being tea and toast. Fifty-one per cent of patients indicated that they would wish to eat the same as normal prior to their appointment and 59% wished to drink as normal. Only 19% of respondents reported that they did not wish to eat anything, with 8% preferring not to drink anything at all. Seventy-nine per cent of the patients reported that they had experienced at least one adverse symptom after fasting and 42% had experienced two or more such symptoms. In general, those patients with more experience of sedation found fasting less unpleasant than those attending for the first time (P<0.05). In addition, one-quarter of all patients indicated that the fasting process had made them feel more nervous about their sedation appointment.

CONCLUSIONS: The extended fasting regimen prior to intravenous sedation appeared to affect patients' wellbeing, as the majority reported adverse symptoms.

Pre-operative fasting for intravenous conscious sedation used in dental treatment: are conclusions based on relative risk management or evidence?

Intravenous sedation is a widely used pharmacological method of patient management commonly used in dental surgery for the treatment of anxious patients. Variety exists in fasting regimes between different centres offering dental sedation, with some advocating starvation in line with general anaesthesia protocols and others not enforcing starvation at all. The currently available guidelines on fasting protocols are ambiguous and open to interpretation partly because they are based on expert opinion rather than evidence-based research. This article reviews the available evidence on the subject of pre-operative fasting and discusses current guidelines.

The implausibility of ‘usual care’ in an open system: sedation and weaning practices in Paediatric Intensive Care Units (PICUs) in the United Kingdom (UK).

Background
The power of the randomised controlled trial depends upon its capacity to operate in a closed system whereby the intervention is the only causal force acting upon the experimental group and absent in the control group, permitting a valid assessment of intervention efficacy. Conversely, clinical arenas are open systems where factors relating to context, resources, interpretation and actions of individuals will affect implementation and effectiveness of interventions. Consequently, the comparator (usual care) can be difficult to define and variable in multi-centre trials. Hence outcomes cannot be understood without considering usual care and factors that may affect implementation and impact on the intervention.

Methods
Using a fieldwork approach, we describe PICU context, ‘usual’ practice in sedation and weaning from mechanical ventilation, and factors affecting implementation prior to designing a trial involving a sedation and ventilation weaning intervention. We collected data from 23 UK PICUs between June and November 2014 using observation, individual and multi-disciplinary group interviews with staff.

Results
Pain and sedation practices were broadly similar in terms of drug usage and assessment tools. Sedation protocols linking assessment to appropriate titration of sedatives and sedation holds were rarely used (9 % and 4 % of PICUs respectively). Ventilator weaning was primarily a medical-led process with 39 % of PICUs engaging senior nurses in the process: weaning protocols were rarely used (9 % of PICUs). Weaning methods were variably based on clinician preference. No formal criteria or use of spontaneous breathing trials were used to test weaning readiness. Seventeen PICUs (74 %) had prior engagement in multi-centre trials, but limited research nurse availability. Barriers to previous trial implementation were intervention complexity, lack of belief in the evidence and inadequate training. Facilitating factors were senior staff buy-in and dedicated research nurse provision.

Conclusions
We examined and identified contextual and organisational factors that may impact on the implementation of our intervention. We found usual practice relating to sedation, analgesia and ventilator weaning broadly similar, yet distinctively different from our proposed intervention, providing assurance in our ability to evaluate intervention effects. The data will enable us to develop an implementation plan; considering these factors we can more fully understand their impact on study outcomes.