Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of periprocedural and procedure room times between moderate sedation and monitored anesthesia care in interventional radiology.
Sotirchos, Vlasios S; Alexander, Erica S; Zhao, Ken; Zhan, Chenyang; Yarmohammadi, Hooman; Ziv, Etay; Erinjeri, Joseph P.
Afiliación
  • Sotirchos VS; Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
  • Alexander ES; Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
  • Zhao K; Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
  • Zhan C; Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
  • Yarmohammadi H; Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
  • Ziv E; Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
  • Erinjeri JP; Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States.
J Clin Imaging Sci ; 14: 11, 2024.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38628610
ABSTRACT

Objectives:

In recent years, there has been increased utilization of monitored anesthesia care (MAC) in interventional radiology (IR) departments. The purpose of this study was to compare pre-procedure bed, procedure room, and post-procedure bed times for IR procedures performed with either nurse-administered moderate sedation (MOSED) or MAC. Material and

Methods:

An institutional review board-approved single institution retrospective review of IR procedures between January 2010 and September 2022 was performed. Procedures performed with general anesthesia or local anesthetic only, missing time stamps, or where <50 cases were performed for both MAC and MOSED were excluded from the study. Pre-procedure bed, procedure room, post-procedure bed, and total IR encounter times were compared between MAC and MOSED using the t-test. The effect size was estimated using Cohen's d statistic.

Results:

97,480 cases spanning 69 procedure codes were examined. Mean time in pre-procedure bed was 27 min longer for MAC procedures (69 vs. 42 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.95). Mean procedure room time was 11 min shorter for MAC (60 vs. 71 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.48), and mean time in post-procedure bed was 10 min longer for MAC (102 vs. 92 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.22). Total IR encounter times were on average 27 min longer for MAC cases (231 vs. 204 min, P < 0.001, d = 0.41).

Conclusion:

MAC improves the utilization of IR procedure rooms, but at the cost of increased patient time in the pre- and post-procedure areas.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Imaging Sci Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Imaging Sci Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos