Cargando…

Evaluation of anesthesia quality with three methods: “propofol + fentanyl” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” in patients referred to the scoping ward

INTRODUCTION: Toleration of the complexity and pain of interventions such as endoscopy and colonoscopy is highly difficult for patients. Considering the disagreement on the method of injection of propofol, this study was performed to evaluate the quality of anesthesia using the three methods of prop...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Edalatkhah, Sepehr, Hazrati, Ebrahim, Hashemi, Mahmoodreza, Golaghaei, Alireza, Kheradmand, Behroz, Rafiei, Mohamadreza
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8963641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35360792
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1387_21
_version_ 1784678034611109888
author Edalatkhah, Sepehr
Hazrati, Ebrahim
Hashemi, Mahmoodreza
Golaghaei, Alireza
Kheradmand, Behroz
Rafiei, Mohamadreza
author_facet Edalatkhah, Sepehr
Hazrati, Ebrahim
Hashemi, Mahmoodreza
Golaghaei, Alireza
Kheradmand, Behroz
Rafiei, Mohamadreza
author_sort Edalatkhah, Sepehr
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Toleration of the complexity and pain of interventions such as endoscopy and colonoscopy is highly difficult for patients. Considering the disagreement on the method of injection of propofol, this study was performed to evaluate the quality of anesthesia using the three methods of propofol + fentanyl, propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine, and propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine. METHODS: This one-way blind clinical trial study included 99 patients who were admitted in three groups by block randomization method. In a group of patients that were sedated with propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine, the dose of all drugs is reduced by half the amount of the other groups. Variables included age, sex, frequency of cough, apnea, need for jaw thrust maneuver, O(2) saturation, duration of recovery, and procedural satisfaction. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 20.0. P value of < 0.05 was considered to be significant. RESULTS: The three groups were similar in terms of demographic characteristics. The effects of the three sedation protocols on the variables showed that patient’s apnea, cough, O(2) saturation, and also proceduralist satisfaction in the group of the patient that sedated with four drugs was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than other groups. But there was no significant difference between the three groups when comparing the recovery time and need for jaw thrust during the procedure. CONCLUSION: The findings of the present study showed that the use of combination of “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” with lower doses, significantly results in higher quality sedation compared with higher doses of “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” or “propofol + fentanyl” for scoping procedures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8963641
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89636412022-03-30 Evaluation of anesthesia quality with three methods: “propofol + fentanyl” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” in patients referred to the scoping ward Edalatkhah, Sepehr Hazrati, Ebrahim Hashemi, Mahmoodreza Golaghaei, Alireza Kheradmand, Behroz Rafiei, Mohamadreza J Family Med Prim Care Original Article INTRODUCTION: Toleration of the complexity and pain of interventions such as endoscopy and colonoscopy is highly difficult for patients. Considering the disagreement on the method of injection of propofol, this study was performed to evaluate the quality of anesthesia using the three methods of propofol + fentanyl, propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine, and propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine. METHODS: This one-way blind clinical trial study included 99 patients who were admitted in three groups by block randomization method. In a group of patients that were sedated with propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine, the dose of all drugs is reduced by half the amount of the other groups. Variables included age, sex, frequency of cough, apnea, need for jaw thrust maneuver, O(2) saturation, duration of recovery, and procedural satisfaction. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 20.0. P value of < 0.05 was considered to be significant. RESULTS: The three groups were similar in terms of demographic characteristics. The effects of the three sedation protocols on the variables showed that patient’s apnea, cough, O(2) saturation, and also proceduralist satisfaction in the group of the patient that sedated with four drugs was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than other groups. But there was no significant difference between the three groups when comparing the recovery time and need for jaw thrust during the procedure. CONCLUSION: The findings of the present study showed that the use of combination of “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” with lower doses, significantly results in higher quality sedation compared with higher doses of “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” or “propofol + fentanyl” for scoping procedures. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2022-02 2022-02-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8963641/ /pubmed/35360792 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1387_21 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Edalatkhah, Sepehr
Hazrati, Ebrahim
Hashemi, Mahmoodreza
Golaghaei, Alireza
Kheradmand, Behroz
Rafiei, Mohamadreza
Evaluation of anesthesia quality with three methods: “propofol + fentanyl” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” in patients referred to the scoping ward
title Evaluation of anesthesia quality with three methods: “propofol + fentanyl” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” in patients referred to the scoping ward
title_full Evaluation of anesthesia quality with three methods: “propofol + fentanyl” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” in patients referred to the scoping ward
title_fullStr Evaluation of anesthesia quality with three methods: “propofol + fentanyl” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” in patients referred to the scoping ward
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of anesthesia quality with three methods: “propofol + fentanyl” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” in patients referred to the scoping ward
title_short Evaluation of anesthesia quality with three methods: “propofol + fentanyl” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” in patients referred to the scoping ward
title_sort evaluation of anesthesia quality with three methods: “propofol + fentanyl” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine” vs. “propofol + fentanyl + lidocaine + ketamine” in patients referred to the scoping ward
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8963641/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35360792
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1387_21
work_keys_str_mv AT edalatkhahsepehr evaluationofanesthesiaqualitywiththreemethodspropofolfentanylvspropofolfentanyllidocainevspropofolfentanyllidocaineketamineinpatientsreferredtothescopingward
AT hazratiebrahim evaluationofanesthesiaqualitywiththreemethodspropofolfentanylvspropofolfentanyllidocainevspropofolfentanyllidocaineketamineinpatientsreferredtothescopingward
AT hashemimahmoodreza evaluationofanesthesiaqualitywiththreemethodspropofolfentanylvspropofolfentanyllidocainevspropofolfentanyllidocaineketamineinpatientsreferredtothescopingward
AT golaghaeialireza evaluationofanesthesiaqualitywiththreemethodspropofolfentanylvspropofolfentanyllidocainevspropofolfentanyllidocaineketamineinpatientsreferredtothescopingward
AT kheradmandbehroz evaluationofanesthesiaqualitywiththreemethodspropofolfentanylvspropofolfentanyllidocainevspropofolfentanyllidocaineketamineinpatientsreferredtothescopingward
AT rafieimohamadreza evaluationofanesthesiaqualitywiththreemethodspropofolfentanylvspropofolfentanyllidocainevspropofolfentanyllidocaineketamineinpatientsreferredtothescopingward