RESUMO
Meperidine and fentanyl are opioids currently used in addition to midazolam for sedation and analgesia during colonoscopy in Italy. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of patients' psychological state before elective colonoscopy on the efficacy of the sedation regimens. Eighty outpatients who underwent an elective colonoscopy were included in our study. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaire was self-administered to evaluate basal anxiety and depression state. The rate of baseline discomfort was evaluated by a standard 100-mm visual analog scale. Sedation was obtained alternatively with a midazolam-meperidine or midazolam-fentanyl combination. There were no statistically significant differences between the fentanyl and meperidine groups on body mass index, age, and gender composition. Patients in the meperidine group reported less pain during colonoscopy than patients in the fentanyl group. There were statistically significant positive correlations in the meperidine group with the distress, anxiety, and depression. Our study has pointed out greater effectiveness of the midazolam plus meperidine regimen, equal recovery times, and no significant differences in the duration of the endoscopic examinations. The evaluation of patients' psychological status seems to predict the efficacy of sedation when the nociceptive component of pain is well controlled.
Assuntos
Colonoscopia/psicologia , Sedação Consciente , Fentanila/uso terapêutico , Meperidina/uso terapêutico , Midazolam/uso terapêutico , Angústia Psicológica , Adulto , Idoso , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Quimioterapia Combinada , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos , Feminino , Humanos , Hipnóticos e Sedativos/uso terapêutico , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Although sedatives and analgesic drugs defuse anxiety and relieve pain, digestive endoscopy still is uncomfortable and painful for some patients. Identifying patients who tolerate digestive endoscopy less well remains difficult. The present study evaluated the relations between procedural anxiety, catastrophizing thoughts, and pain, using a prospective design and multimodal assessments of pain. METHODS: A total of 118 consecutive patients were assessed for procedural anxiety before endoscopy. During endoscopy, a doctor rated the patients' pain behavior. Before discharge, the patients retrospectively rated endoscopy pain and related catastrophizing thoughts. RESULTS: Notwithstanding sedation, our study revealed large between-subject variability in pain. Catastrophizing thoughts mediated the relation between procedure-related pain observed by the doctor and pain intensity reported by the patient. Catastrophizing thoughts also mediated the effect of procedural anxiety. Our study showed that anxiety exacerbates endoscopy pain when the patient engages in ruminative thinking and feels unable to cope with unpleasant bodily sensations. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that catastrophizing thoughts account for between-subject differences in endoscopy pain. Rumination and helplessness but not magnification explain how procedural anxiety may evolve in a painful endoscopy experience. To the extent that one can address catastrophizing thoughts, endoscopy pain can be mitigated, especially for patients who are difficult to sedate.