Patient-maintained versus anaesthetist-controlled propofol sedation during elective primary lower limb arthroplasty performed under spinal anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial

Hewson, David W, Worcester, Frank, Sprinks, James , Smith, Murray D, Buchanan, Heather, Breedon, Philip, Hardman, Jonathon G and Bedforth, Nigel M (2021) Patient-maintained versus anaesthetist-controlled propofol sedation during elective primary lower limb arthroplasty performed under spinal anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Anaesthesia . ISSN 0007-0912

Full content URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2021.09.038

Documents
Patient-maintained versus anaesthetist-controlled propofol sedation during elective primary lower limb arthroplasty performed under spinal anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial
Authors' Accepted Manuscript
Patient-maintained versus anaesthetist-controlled propofol sedation during elective primary lower limb arthroplasty performed under spinal anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial
Published Open Access manuscript
[img]
[Download]
[img] PDF
BJA-2021-00561-ARA012.R2_Proof_hi.pdf - Whole Document
Restricted to Repository staff only
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International.

591kB
[img]
Preview
PDF
PIIS0007091221006516.pdf - Whole Document
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.

518kB
Item Type:Article
Item Status:Live Archive

Abstract

Background: Patient-maintained propofol sedation (PMPS) allows patients to titrate their own target-controlled infusion (TCI) delivery of propofol sedation using a handheld button. The aim of this randomised controlled trial was to compare PMPS with anaesthetist-controlled propofol TCI sedation (ACPS) in patients undergoing elective primary lower limb arthroplasty surgery under spinal anaesthesia.
Methods: In this single-centre, open-label, investigator-led study, adult patients were randomly assigned to either PMPS or ACPS during their surgery. Both sedation regimes used Schnider effect-site TCI modelling. The primary outcome measure was infusion rate adjusted for weight (expressed as mg kg-1 hr-1). Secondary outcomes measures included depth of sedation, occurrence of sedation-related adverse events and time to medical readiness for discharge from the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU).
Results: Eighty patients (48 females) were randomised. Patients using PMPS used 39.3% less propofol during the sedation period compared to patients in group ACPS (1.56 (0.57) vs 2.56 (1.33) mg kg-1 hr-1; p < 0.001), experienced fewer discrete episodes of deep sedation (0 vs 6, p = 0.0256), fewer airway/breathing adverse events (odds ratio (95% CI) 2.94 (1.31 –6.64); p = 0.009) and were ready for discharge from PACU more quickly (8.94 (5.5) vs 13.51 (7.2) minutes; p = 0.0027).
Conclusion: PMPS during lower limb arthroplasty under spinal anaesthesia results in reduced drug exposure and fewer episodes of sedation related adverse events compared to ACPS. To facilitate further investigation of this procedural sedation technique, PMPS-capable TCI infusion devices should be submitted for regulatory approval for clinical use.

Additional Information:International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Registry: ISRCTN29129799
Keywords:Conscious sedation, Propofol, Hypnotics and sedatives, Anti-anxiety agents, Patient satisfaction, Arthroplasty, replacement
Subjects:A Medicine and Dentistry > A300 Clinical Medicine
Divisions:College of Social Science > School of Health & Social Care
ID Code:47018
Deposited On:08 Nov 2021 14:32

Repository Staff Only: item control page