Comparison of the effects of target-controlled infusion-remifentanil/midazolam and manual fentanyl/midazolam administration on patient parameters in dental procedures

Douglas Lobb, N. Ameli, Silvia Ortiz, Hollis Lai
{"title":"Comparison of the effects of target-controlled infusion-remifentanil/midazolam and manual fentanyl/midazolam administration on patient parameters in dental procedures","authors":"Douglas Lobb, N. Ameli, Silvia Ortiz, Hollis Lai","doi":"10.17245/jdapm.2022.22.2.117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Moderate sedation is an integral part of dental care delivery. Target-controlled infusion (TCI) has the potential to improve patient safety and outcome. We compared the effects of using TCI to administer remifentanil/manual bolus midazolam with manual bolus fentanyl/midazolam administration on patient safety parameters, drug administration times, and patient recovery times. Methods In this retrospective chart review, records of patients who underwent moderate intravenous sedation over 12 months in a private dental clinic were assessed. Patient indicators (pre-, intra-, and post-procedure noninvasive systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respiration, and heart rate) were compared using independent t-test analysis. Patient recovery time, procedure length, and midazolam dosage required were also compared between the two groups. Results Eighty-five patient charts were included in the final analysis: 47 received TCI-remifentanil/midazolam sedation, and 38 received manual fentanyl/midazolam sedation. Among the physiological parameters, diastolic blood pressure showed slightly higher changes in the fentanyl group (P = 0.049), respiratory rate changes showed higher changes in the fentanyl group (P = 0.032), and the average EtCO2 was slightly higher in the remifentanil group (P = 0.041). There was no significant difference in the minimum SpO2 levels and average procedure length between the fentanyl and remifentanil TCI pump groups (P > 0.05). However, a significant difference was observed in the time required for discharge from the chair (P = 0.048), indicating that patients who received remifentanil required less time for discharge from the chair than those who received fentanyl. The dosage of midazolam used in the fentanyl group was 0.487 mg more than that in the remifentanil group; however, the difference was not significant (P > 0.05). Conclusion The combination of TCI administered remifentanil combined with manual administered midazolam has the potential to shorten the recovery time and reduce respiration rate changes when compared to manual administration of fentanyl/midazolam. This is possibly due to either the lower midazolam dosage required with TCI remifentanil administration or achieving a stable, steady-state low dose remifentanil concentration for the duration of the procedure.","PeriodicalId":15634,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","volume":"59 1","pages":"117 - 128"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2022.22.2.117","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background Moderate sedation is an integral part of dental care delivery. Target-controlled infusion (TCI) has the potential to improve patient safety and outcome. We compared the effects of using TCI to administer remifentanil/manual bolus midazolam with manual bolus fentanyl/midazolam administration on patient safety parameters, drug administration times, and patient recovery times. Methods In this retrospective chart review, records of patients who underwent moderate intravenous sedation over 12 months in a private dental clinic were assessed. Patient indicators (pre-, intra-, and post-procedure noninvasive systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respiration, and heart rate) were compared using independent t-test analysis. Patient recovery time, procedure length, and midazolam dosage required were also compared between the two groups. Results Eighty-five patient charts were included in the final analysis: 47 received TCI-remifentanil/midazolam sedation, and 38 received manual fentanyl/midazolam sedation. Among the physiological parameters, diastolic blood pressure showed slightly higher changes in the fentanyl group (P = 0.049), respiratory rate changes showed higher changes in the fentanyl group (P = 0.032), and the average EtCO2 was slightly higher in the remifentanil group (P = 0.041). There was no significant difference in the minimum SpO2 levels and average procedure length between the fentanyl and remifentanil TCI pump groups (P > 0.05). However, a significant difference was observed in the time required for discharge from the chair (P = 0.048), indicating that patients who received remifentanil required less time for discharge from the chair than those who received fentanyl. The dosage of midazolam used in the fentanyl group was 0.487 mg more than that in the remifentanil group; however, the difference was not significant (P > 0.05). Conclusion The combination of TCI administered remifentanil combined with manual administered midazolam has the potential to shorten the recovery time and reduce respiration rate changes when compared to manual administration of fentanyl/midazolam. This is possibly due to either the lower midazolam dosage required with TCI remifentanil administration or achieving a stable, steady-state low dose remifentanil concentration for the duration of the procedure.
靶控输注瑞芬太尼/咪达唑仑与手动给药芬太尼/咪达唑仑对牙科手术患者参数影响的比较
背景:适度镇静是牙科护理的重要组成部分。靶控输注(TCI)具有改善患者安全性和预后的潜力。我们比较了使用TCI给药瑞芬太尼/手动给药咪达唑仑与手动给药芬太尼/咪达唑仑对患者安全参数、给药时间和患者恢复时间的影响。方法回顾性分析在私立牙科诊所接受中度静脉镇静治疗12个月的患者。患者指标(术前、术中和术后无创收缩压和舒张压、呼吸和心率)采用独立t检验分析进行比较。比较两组患者的恢复时间、手术时间和所需咪达唑仑剂量。结果85例患者纳入最终分析,47例采用tci -瑞芬太尼/咪达唑仑镇静,38例采用手动芬太尼/咪达唑仑镇静。生理参数中,芬太尼组舒张压变化略高于芬太尼组(P = 0.049),呼吸速率变化高于芬太尼组(P = 0.032),平均EtCO2略高于瑞芬太尼组(P = 0.041)。芬太尼和瑞芬太尼TCI泵组的最低SpO2水平和平均手术时间差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。然而,在从椅子上出院所需的时间上观察到显著差异(P = 0.048),表明接受瑞芬太尼治疗的患者比接受芬太尼治疗的患者需要更短的出院时间。芬太尼组咪达唑仑用量比瑞芬太尼组多0.487 mg;但两组间差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论TCI给药瑞芬太尼联合手动给药咪达唑仑与手动给药芬太尼/咪达唑仑相比,有可能缩短恢复时间,减少呼吸速率变化。这可能是由于TCI使用瑞芬太尼所需的咪达唑仑剂量较低,或者在手术过程中达到稳定、稳定的低剂量瑞芬太尼浓度。
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
×
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