Sofus Andreassen, Vibe Maria Laden Nielsen, Anne Lund Krarup, Annika Kamp, Dennis Møller Andersen, Steven Krogh-Larsen, Dorte Melgaard
{"title":"Remimazolam for procedural sedation in the emergency department: a prospective study of effectiveness and patient satisfaction.","authors":"Sofus Andreassen, Vibe Maria Laden Nielsen, Anne Lund Krarup, Annika Kamp, Dennis Møller Andersen, Steven Krogh-Larsen, Dorte Melgaard","doi":"10.1186/s13049-025-01402-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Remimazolam (RM) is a novel ultra-short acting benzodiazepine. This study evaluates the safety of using RM for procedural sedation in the emergency department (ED) comparing its administration by registered nurse anaesthetists versus house officers in 1st year residency in emergency medicine and emergency medicine physicians without previous anaesthesiologic specialisation. Secondary aims were patient satisfaction and proportion of successful procedures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective study was performed at the ED at Aalborg University Hospital from 10 May through 20 August 2024. Five emergency medicine physicians (group 1) started administering RM to patients after completion of training and direct supervision. Results were compared to patients sedated by two registered nurse anaesthetists (group 2) who had been administering RM more than 50 times before study start. Time was recorded during sedation and a questionnaire filled out immediately after the patient had awakened. T-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare groups. Proportions were calculated with chi-square (χ<sup>2</sup>) tests of proportion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In group 1, 53 patients were sedated by emergency medicine physicians, and in group 2, 50 patients were sedated by registered nurse anaesthetists. No or mild respiratory adverse effects were observed in 97% of patients in group 1 versus 100% in group 2. Procedural amnesia was 93% in group 1 versus 90% in group 2. Patients were safe to be left unsupervised after a median of 15 min in both groups. Procedural success was 92% in group 1 versus 100% in group 2.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Severe respiratory adverse effects after sedation were rare in both groups. Most patients had amnesia and adequate pain relief for the procedure. The use of RM by physicians without anaesthesiologic specialisation is considered a safe and effective alternative for procedural sedation in the ED.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>The study was registered and approved as a quality study (ID 2017-011259) by the hospital administration.</p>","PeriodicalId":49292,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Trauma Resuscitation & Emergency Medicine","volume":"33 1","pages":"93"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12093871/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Trauma Resuscitation & Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-025-01402-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Remimazolam (RM) is a novel ultra-short acting benzodiazepine. This study evaluates the safety of using RM for procedural sedation in the emergency department (ED) comparing its administration by registered nurse anaesthetists versus house officers in 1st year residency in emergency medicine and emergency medicine physicians without previous anaesthesiologic specialisation. Secondary aims were patient satisfaction and proportion of successful procedures.
Methods: This prospective study was performed at the ED at Aalborg University Hospital from 10 May through 20 August 2024. Five emergency medicine physicians (group 1) started administering RM to patients after completion of training and direct supervision. Results were compared to patients sedated by two registered nurse anaesthetists (group 2) who had been administering RM more than 50 times before study start. Time was recorded during sedation and a questionnaire filled out immediately after the patient had awakened. T-tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare groups. Proportions were calculated with chi-square (χ2) tests of proportion.
Results: In group 1, 53 patients were sedated by emergency medicine physicians, and in group 2, 50 patients were sedated by registered nurse anaesthetists. No or mild respiratory adverse effects were observed in 97% of patients in group 1 versus 100% in group 2. Procedural amnesia was 93% in group 1 versus 90% in group 2. Patients were safe to be left unsupervised after a median of 15 min in both groups. Procedural success was 92% in group 1 versus 100% in group 2.
Conclusions: Severe respiratory adverse effects after sedation were rare in both groups. Most patients had amnesia and adequate pain relief for the procedure. The use of RM by physicians without anaesthesiologic specialisation is considered a safe and effective alternative for procedural sedation in the ED.
Trial registration: The study was registered and approved as a quality study (ID 2017-011259) by the hospital administration.
期刊介绍：
The primary topics of interest in Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine (SJTREM) are the pre-hospital and early in-hospital diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of emergency medicine, trauma, and resuscitation. Contributions focusing on dispatch, major incidents, etiology, pathophysiology, rehabilitation, epidemiology, prevention, education, training, implementation, work environment, as well as ethical and socio-economic aspects may also be assessed for publication.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
