Rodelei Siao-Salera, Joseph W Leung, Surinder K Mann, Wilhelmina Canete, Rebeck Gutierrez, Claire Reyes Galzote, Felix W Leung
{"title":"Options of sedation or no sedation for colonoscopy - the perspective of the GI nurses and technicians.","authors":"Rodelei Siao-Salera, Joseph W Leung, Surinder K Mann, Wilhelmina Canete, Rebeck Gutierrez, Claire Reyes Galzote, Felix W Leung","doi":"10.4161/jig.1.1.14601","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>OBJECTIVE: Nurses (patient-advocates) and technicians (member of colonoscopy team) collected data on patient discomfort and evaluated various options of sedation or no sedation associated with the air and water methods for performing colonoscopy. METHOD: Veterans participated in studies comparing air and water method colonoscopy. Options using minimal or on demand sedation were evaluated. RESULTS: Compared with the air method, the water method was associated with significantly lower pain scores, higher patient satisfaction ratings and shorter recovery times. On demand sedation was comparable to routine sedation when the water method was used. Patients prefer to be in control of when their medications would be administered during colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: Evaluations by nurses (patient advocates) and technicians (member of colonoscopy team) with experience in assisting patients undergoing colonoscopy using the various options indicate the following. In settings without access to sedation, the water method is ideal for unsedated colonoscopy or extended flexible sigmoidoscopy for screening. Otherwise, the water method and on demand sedation is the most credible combination of options for patient care.</p>","PeriodicalId":89416,"journal":{"name":"Journal of interventional gastroenterology","volume":"1 1","pages":"37-41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3109464/pdf/jig0101_0037.pdf","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of interventional gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4161/jig.1.1.14601","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Nurses (patient-advocates) and technicians (member of colonoscopy team) collected data on patient discomfort and evaluated various options of sedation or no sedation associated with the air and water methods for performing colonoscopy. METHOD: Veterans participated in studies comparing air and water method colonoscopy. Options using minimal or on demand sedation were evaluated. RESULTS: Compared with the air method, the water method was associated with significantly lower pain scores, higher patient satisfaction ratings and shorter recovery times. On demand sedation was comparable to routine sedation when the water method was used. Patients prefer to be in control of when their medications would be administered during colonoscopy. CONCLUSION: Evaluations by nurses (patient advocates) and technicians (member of colonoscopy team) with experience in assisting patients undergoing colonoscopy using the various options indicate the following. In settings without access to sedation, the water method is ideal for unsedated colonoscopy or extended flexible sigmoidoscopy for screening. Otherwise, the water method and on demand sedation is the most credible combination of options for patient care.