Physiologic monitoring practices during pediatric procedural sedation: a report from the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium.

Melissa L Langhan, Michael Mallory, James Hertzog, Lia Lowrie, Joseph Cravero
{"title":"Physiologic monitoring practices during pediatric procedural sedation: a report from the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium.","authors":"Melissa L Langhan,&nbsp;Michael Mallory,&nbsp;James Hertzog,&nbsp;Lia Lowrie,&nbsp;Joseph Cravero","doi":"10.1001/archpediatrics.2012.1023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To describe the frequency of different physiologic monitoring modalities and combinations of modalities used during pediatric procedural sedation; to describe how physiologic monitoring varies among different classes of patients, health care providers (ie, ranging from anesthesiologists to emergency medicine physicians to nurse practitioners), procedures, and sedative medications employed; and to determine the proportion of sedations meeting published guidelines for physiologic monitoring. DESIGN This was a prospective, observational study from September 1, 2007, through March 31, 2011.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Data were collected in areas outside of the operating room, such as intensive care units, radiology, emergency departments, and clinics.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Thirty-seven institutions comprise the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium that prospectively collects data on procedural sedation/anesthesia performed outside of the operating room in all children up to age 21 years.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Data including demographics, procedure performed, provider level, adverse events, medications, and physiologic monitors used are entered into a web-based system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from 114 855 subjects were collected and analyzed. The frequency of use of each physiologic monitoring modality by health care provider type, medication used, and procedure performed varied significantly. The largest difference in frequency of monitoring use was seen between providers using electrocardiography (13%-95%); the smallest overall differences were seen in monitoring use based on the American Society of Anesthesiologists classifications (1%-10%). Guidelines published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Emergency Physicians, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists for nonanesthesiologists were adhered to for 52% of subjects.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A large degree of variability exists in the use of physiologic monitoring modalities for pediatric procedural sedation. Differences in monitoring are evident between sedation providers, medications, procedures, and patient types.</p>","PeriodicalId":8310,"journal":{"name":"Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine","volume":"166 11","pages":"990-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1001/archpediatrics.2012.1023","citationCount":"38","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/archpediatrics.2012.1023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 38

Abstract

Objectives: To describe the frequency of different physiologic monitoring modalities and combinations of modalities used during pediatric procedural sedation; to describe how physiologic monitoring varies among different classes of patients, health care providers (ie, ranging from anesthesiologists to emergency medicine physicians to nurse practitioners), procedures, and sedative medications employed; and to determine the proportion of sedations meeting published guidelines for physiologic monitoring. DESIGN This was a prospective, observational study from September 1, 2007, through March 31, 2011.

Setting: Data were collected in areas outside of the operating room, such as intensive care units, radiology, emergency departments, and clinics.

Participants: Thirty-seven institutions comprise the Pediatric Sedation Research Consortium that prospectively collects data on procedural sedation/anesthesia performed outside of the operating room in all children up to age 21 years.

Main outcome measures: Data including demographics, procedure performed, provider level, adverse events, medications, and physiologic monitors used are entered into a web-based system.

Results: Data from 114 855 subjects were collected and analyzed. The frequency of use of each physiologic monitoring modality by health care provider type, medication used, and procedure performed varied significantly. The largest difference in frequency of monitoring use was seen between providers using electrocardiography (13%-95%); the smallest overall differences were seen in monitoring use based on the American Society of Anesthesiologists classifications (1%-10%). Guidelines published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Emergency Physicians, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists for nonanesthesiologists were adhered to for 52% of subjects.

Conclusions: A large degree of variability exists in the use of physiologic monitoring modalities for pediatric procedural sedation. Differences in monitoring are evident between sedation providers, medications, procedures, and patient types.

儿童镇静过程中的生理监测实践:一份来自儿科镇静研究联盟的报告。
目的:描述小儿程序性镇静中使用的不同生理监测方式和方式组合的频率;描述不同类别的患者、卫生保健提供者(即从麻醉师到急诊医师到执业护士)、程序和所使用的镇静药物之间的生理监测差异;并确定符合公布的生理监测指南的镇静比例。设计:这是一项从2007年9月1日至2011年3月31日的前瞻性观察性研究。环境:数据收集于手术室以外的区域,如重症监护病房、放射科、急诊科和诊所。参与者:37家机构组成了儿科镇静研究联盟,该联盟前瞻性地收集了所有21岁以下儿童在手术室外进行的程序性镇静/麻醉的数据。主要结果测量:数据包括人口统计、执行的程序、提供者水平、不良事件、药物和使用的生理监测输入到基于网络的系统中。结果:收集并分析了114 855名受试者的资料。每种生理监测方式的使用频率因医疗保健提供者类型、使用的药物和执行的程序而有显著差异。使用心电图的提供者之间监测使用频率差异最大(13%-95%);根据美国麻醉医师协会的分类,监测使用方面的总体差异最小(1%-10%)。52%的受试者遵守了美国儿科学会、美国急诊医师学会和美国麻醉医师学会为非麻醉医师发布的指南。结论:在小儿手术镇静中使用的生理监测方式存在很大程度的差异。监测的差异在镇静提供者、药物、程序和患者类型之间是明显的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
1 months
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信