V. Sotirchos, Erica S. Alexander, Ken Zhao, Chenyang Zhan, H. Yarmohammadi, E. Ziv, J. Erinjeri
{"title":"Comparison of periprocedural and procedure room times between moderate sedation and monitored anesthesia care in interventional radiology","authors":"V. Sotirchos, Erica S. Alexander, Ken Zhao, Chenyang Zhan, H. Yarmohammadi, E. Ziv, J. Erinjeri","doi":"10.25259/JCIS_9_2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: In recent years, there has been increased utilization of monitored anesthesia care (MAC) in interventional radiology (IR) departments. The purpose of this study was to compare pre-procedure bed, procedure room, and post-procedure bed times for IR procedures performed with either nurse-administered moderate sedation (MOSED) or MAC. Material and Methods: An institutional review board-approved single institution retrospective review of IR procedures between January 2010 and September 2022 was performed. Procedures performed with general anesthesia or local anesthetic only, missing time stamps, or where <50 cases were performed for both MAC and MOSED were excluded from the study. Pre-procedure bed, procedure room, post-procedure bed, and total IR encounter times were compared between MAC and MOSED using the t-test. The effect size was estimated using Cohen’s d statistic. Results: 97,480 cases spanning 69 procedure codes were examined. Mean time in pre-procedure bed was 27 min longer for MAC procedures (69 vs. 42 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.95). Mean procedure room time was 11 min shorter for MAC (60 vs. 71 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.48), and mean time in post-procedure bed was 10 min longer for MAC (102 vs. 92 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.22). Total IR encounter times were on average 27 min longer for MAC cases (231 vs. 204 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.41). Conclusion: MAC improves the utilization of IR procedure rooms, but at the cost of increased patient time in the pre- and post-procedure areas.","PeriodicalId":15512,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Imaging Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Imaging Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/JCIS_9_2024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: In recent years, there has been increased utilization of monitored anesthesia care (MAC) in interventional radiology (IR) departments. The purpose of this study was to compare pre-procedure bed, procedure room, and post-procedure bed times for IR procedures performed with either nurse-administered moderate sedation (MOSED) or MAC. Material and Methods: An institutional review board-approved single institution retrospective review of IR procedures between January 2010 and September 2022 was performed. Procedures performed with general anesthesia or local anesthetic only, missing time stamps, or where <50 cases were performed for both MAC and MOSED were excluded from the study. Pre-procedure bed, procedure room, post-procedure bed, and total IR encounter times were compared between MAC and MOSED using the t-test. The effect size was estimated using Cohen’s d statistic. Results: 97,480 cases spanning 69 procedure codes were examined. Mean time in pre-procedure bed was 27 min longer for MAC procedures (69 vs. 42 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.95). Mean procedure room time was 11 min shorter for MAC (60 vs. 71 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.48), and mean time in post-procedure bed was 10 min longer for MAC (102 vs. 92 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.22). Total IR encounter times were on average 27 min longer for MAC cases (231 vs. 204 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.41). Conclusion: MAC improves the utilization of IR procedure rooms, but at the cost of increased patient time in the pre- and post-procedure areas.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Clinical Imaging Science (JCIS) is an open access peer-reviewed journal committed to publishing high-quality articles in the field of Imaging Science. The journal aims to present Imaging Science and relevant clinical information in an understandable and useful format. The journal is owned and published by the Scientific Scholar. Audience Our audience includes Radiologists, Researchers, Clinicians, medical professionals and students. Review process JCIS has a highly rigorous peer-review process that makes sure that manuscripts are scientifically accurate, relevant, novel and important. Authors disclose all conflicts, affiliations and financial associations such that the published content is not biased.