Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Pediatric Radiology 8/2014

01.08.2014 | Original Article

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

verfasst von: Elizabeth T. Emrath, Jana A. Stockwell, Courtney E. McCracken, Harold K. Simon, Pradip P. Kamat

Erschienen in: Pediatric Radiology | Ausgabe 8/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

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.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Mason KP, Fontaine PJ, Robinson F et al (2012) Pediatric sedation in a community hospital-based outpatient MRI center. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:448–452PubMedCrossRef Mason KP, Fontaine PJ, Robinson F et al (2012) Pediatric sedation in a community hospital-based outpatient MRI center. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:448–452PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Havidich JE, Cravero JP (2012) The current status of procedural sedation for pediatric patients in out-of-operating room locations. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 25:453–460PubMedCrossRef Havidich JE, Cravero JP (2012) The current status of procedural sedation for pediatric patients in out-of-operating room locations. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 25:453–460PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Couloures KG, Beach M, Cravero JP et al (2011) Impact of provider specialty on pediatric procedural sedation complication rates. Pediatrics 127:e1154–e1160PubMedCrossRef Couloures KG, Beach M, Cravero JP et al (2011) Impact of provider specialty on pediatric procedural sedation complication rates. Pediatrics 127:e1154–e1160PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Rabbitts JA, Groenewald CB, Moriarty JP et al (2010) Epidemiology of ambulatory anesthesia for children in the United States: 2006 and 1996. Anesth Analg 111:1011–1015PubMed Rabbitts JA, Groenewald CB, Moriarty JP et al (2010) Epidemiology of ambulatory anesthesia for children in the United States: 2006 and 1996. Anesth Analg 111:1011–1015PubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Lowrie L, Weiss AH, Lacombe C (1998) The pediatric sedation unit: a mechanism for pediatric sedation. Pediatrics 102:E30PubMedCrossRef Lowrie L, Weiss AH, Lacombe C (1998) The pediatric sedation unit: a mechanism for pediatric sedation. Pediatrics 102:E30PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Krauss B, Green SM (2006) Procedural sedation and analgesia in children. Lancet 367:766–780PubMedCrossRef Krauss B, Green SM (2006) Procedural sedation and analgesia in children. Lancet 367:766–780PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Cravero JP, Beach ML, Blike GT et al (2009) 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. Anesth Analg 108:795–804PubMedCrossRef Cravero JP, Beach ML, Blike GT et al (2009) 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. Anesth Analg 108:795–804PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Malviya S, Voepel-Lewis T, Tait AR (1997) Adverse events and risk factors associated with the sedation of children by nonanesthesiologists. Anesth Analg 85:1207–1213PubMed Malviya S, Voepel-Lewis T, Tait AR (1997) Adverse events and risk factors associated with the sedation of children by nonanesthesiologists. Anesth Analg 85:1207–1213PubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat King WK, Stockwell JA, DeGuzman MA et al (2006) Evaluation of a pediatric-sedation service for common diagnostic procedures. Acad Emerg Med 13:673–6765 King WK, Stockwell JA, DeGuzman MA et al (2006) Evaluation of a pediatric-sedation service for common diagnostic procedures. Acad Emerg Med 13:673–6765
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Patel KN, Simon HK, Stockwell CA et al (2009) Pediatric procedural sedation by a dedicated nonanesthesiology pediatric sedation service using propofol. Pediatric Emerg Care 25:133–138CrossRef Patel KN, Simon HK, Stockwell CA et al (2009) Pediatric procedural sedation by a dedicated nonanesthesiology pediatric sedation service using propofol. Pediatric Emerg Care 25:133–138CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Griffiths MA, Kamat PP, McCracken CE et al (2013) Is procedural sedation with propofol acceptable for complex imaging? A comparison of short vs. prolonged sedations in children. Pediatr Radiol 43:1273–1278PubMedCrossRef Griffiths MA, Kamat PP, McCracken CE et al (2013) Is procedural sedation with propofol acceptable for complex imaging? A comparison of short vs. prolonged sedations in children. Pediatr Radiol 43:1273–1278PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat American Society of Anesthesiologists (1963) New classification of physical status. Anesthesiology 24:111 American Society of Anesthesiologists (1963) New classification of physical status. Anesthesiology 24:111
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Antonelli MT, Seaver D, Urman RD (2013) Procedural sedation and implications for quality and risk management. J Healthc Risk Manag 33:3–10PubMedCrossRef Antonelli MT, Seaver D, Urman RD (2013) Procedural sedation and implications for quality and risk management. J Healthc Risk Manag 33:3–10PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Riphaus A (2010) Endoscopy: consensus on approving propofol sedation by nonanesthesiologists. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 7:187–188PubMedCrossRef Riphaus A (2010) Endoscopy: consensus on approving propofol sedation by nonanesthesiologists. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 7:187–188PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Green SM, Krauss B (2008) Barriers to propofol use in emergency medicine. Ann Emerg Med 52:392–398PubMedCrossRef Green SM, Krauss B (2008) Barriers to propofol use in emergency medicine. Ann Emerg Med 52:392–398PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Cote CJ, Karl HW, Notterman DA et al (2000) Adverse sedation events in pediatrics: analysis of medications used for sedation. Pediatrics 106:633–644PubMedCrossRef Cote CJ, Karl HW, Notterman DA et al (2000) Adverse sedation events in pediatrics: analysis of medications used for sedation. Pediatrics 106:633–644PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Larsen R, Galloway D, Wadera S et al (2009) Safety of propofol sedation for pediatric outpatient procedures. Clin Pediatr 48:819–823CrossRef Larsen R, Galloway D, Wadera S et al (2009) Safety of propofol sedation for pediatric outpatient procedures. Clin Pediatr 48:819–823CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Bhatt M, Kennedy RM, Osmond MH et al (2009) Consensus-based recommendations for standardizing terminology and reporting adverse events for emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia in children. Ann Emerg Med 53:e424CrossRef Bhatt M, Kennedy RM, Osmond MH et al (2009) Consensus-based recommendations for standardizing terminology and reporting adverse events for emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia in children. Ann Emerg Med 53:e424CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Provision of deep procedural sedation by a pediatric sedation team at a freestanding imaging center
verfasst von
Elizabeth T. Emrath
Jana A. Stockwell
Courtney E. McCracken
Harold K. Simon
Pradip P. Kamat
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2014
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Pediatric Radiology / Ausgabe 8/2014
Print ISSN: 0301-0449
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1998
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-2942-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 8/2014

Pediatric Radiology 8/2014 Zur Ausgabe

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

26.04.2024 Mammografie Nachrichten

Routinemäßige Mammografien helfen, Brustkrebs frühzeitig zu erkennen. Anhand der Röntgenuntersuchung lassen sich aber auch kardiovaskuläre Risikopatientinnen identifizieren. Als zuverlässiger Anhaltspunkt gilt die Verkalkung der Brustarterien.

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

23.04.2024 Pankreaskarzinom Nachrichten

Die Empfehlungen zur Therapie des Pankreaskarzinoms wurden um zwei Off-Label-Anwendungen erweitert. Und auch im Bereich der Früherkennung gibt es Aktualisierungen.

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

18.04.2024 Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin Nachrichten

Im Choosing-Wisely-Programm, das für die deutsche Initiative „Klug entscheiden“ Pate gestanden hat, sind erstmals Empfehlungen zum Umgang mit Notfällen von Kindern erschienen. Fünf Dinge gilt es demnach zu vermeiden.

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

13.04.2024 Klinik aktuell Kongressbericht

Die Teilnehmer eines Forums beim DGIM-Kongress waren sich einig: Fehler in der Medizin sind häufig in ungeeigneten Prozessen und mangelnder Kommunikation begründet. Gespräche mit Patienten und im Team können helfen.

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.