XXXX for procedural sedation in emergency medicine.

@entity1 @entity390 @entity26 @entity391 @entity2730 @entity1576 @entity4671
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We describe and analyze the effectiveness and safety of @entity4671 for procedural sedation and evaluate the @entity1 's perspective on effectiveness, side effects, and satisfaction. METHODS: We conducted an observational retrospective study of all @entity1 who received @entity4671 for procedural sedation over 2 years in 3 affiliated suburban emergency departments of a large group-model health maintenance organization. Data were abstracted from the ED records. Additionally, a @entity1 questionnaire was prospectively administered by telephone. RESULTS: @entity4671 was used for sedation in 134 @entity1 between 6 and 93 years of age during 150 procedures. The mean cumulative dose was 0.20 mg/kg. Adjunctive medication was used in 36 (23%) procedures. Moderate sedation with verbal arousability was induced in 48 (32%) @entity1 , and deep sedation with verbal unresponsiveness was induced in 102 (68%) @entity1 . Full recovery to the preprocedural level of alertness was achieved within 30 minutes in 142 (95%) of procedures. Mean changes in systolic blood pressure, pulse rate, and @entity26 saturation were clinically insignificant. There were 7 (4.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.9% to 9.4%) adverse events, including 5 (3.3%; 95% CI 1.1% to 7.6%) cases of @entity26 desaturation below 94% in older @entity1 (>55 years of age) who received slightly higher mean doses of @entity4671 (0.23 mg/kg). Four of these @entity1 received brief assisted bag-valve-mask ventilation and recovered uneventfully; none required endotracheal intubation. The questionnaire was completed by 120 (90%) of 134 @entity1 and involved 136 procedures. During 127 (93%) of these, @entity4671 was believed to be extremely effective in causing sleep, and for 127 (93%) it induced complete procedural @entity2730 . Only 5 (4%) @entity1 experienced @entity390 or @entity391 . Regarding willingness to receive @entity4671 for their next procedure, the @entity1 ' responses were favorable: extremely, 95%; moderately, 2%; slightly, 3%; and not at all, 1%. CONCLUSION: @entity4671 is a useful agent for carefully conducted procedural sedation because it provides effective, brief, deep sedation with little hemodynamic compromise. Its safety may be jeopardized by the occurrence of @entity1576 in older @entity1 receiving higher doses. @entity1 report a high degree of satisfaction with @entity4671 .
