Pediatric procedural sedation in African clinical settings: A mixed methods study of African providers' sedation practices

Background: Little is known about the practice of pediatric procedural sedation in Africa, despite being incredibly useful to the emergency care of children. This study describes the clinical experiences of African medical providers who use pediatric proceduralsedation, including clinical indications, medications, adverse events, training, clinical guideline use, and comfort level. The goals of this study are to describe pediatric sedation practices in resource-limited settings in Africa and identify potential barriers to the provision of safe pediatric sedation. Methods: This mixed methods study describes the pediatric procedural sedation practices of African providers using semi-structured interviews. Purposive sampling was used to identify key informants working in African resource-limited settings across a broad geographic, economic, and professional range. Quantitative data about provider background and sedation practices were collected concurrently with qualitative data about perceived barriers to pediatric procedural sedation and suggestions to improve the practice of pediatric sedation in their settings. All interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed for major themes. Results: Thirty-eight key informants participated, representing 19 countries and the specialties of Anesthesia, Surgery, Pediatrics, Critical Care, Emergency Medicine, and General Practice. The most common indication for pediatric sedation was imaging (42%), the most common medication used was ketamine (92%), and hypoxia was the most common adverse event (61%). Despite 92% of key informants stating that pediatric procedural sedation was critical to their practice, only half reported feeling adequately trained. The three major qualitative themes regarding barriers to safe pediatric sedation in their settings were: lack of resources, lack of education, and lack of standardization across sites and providers. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that training specialized pediatric sedation teams, creating portable "pediatric sedation kits," and producing locally relevant pediatric sedation guidelines may help reduce current barriers to the provision of safe pediatric sedation in resource-limited African settings.

Comparison of Sedation Anesthesia between Midazolam and Midazolam/Alfentanil: for Prolotherapy and Intramuscular Stimulation / 대한마취과학회지

BACKGROUND: The presence of pain during interventional pain management such as prolotherapy and intramuscular stimulation is stressful to patients and can affect the treatment outcome. We studied the safety and efficacy of two drug regimens: midazolam alone and midazolam/alfentanil for sedation anesthesia during prolotherapy and intramuscular stimulation. METHODS: Fifty three patients received either midazolam 0.04-0.08 mg/kg (Group M) or midazolam 0.01-0.02 mg/kg with alfentanil 4-8microgram/kg (Group A) for prolotherapy or intramuscular stimulation. We recorded the pain response, sedation score and side effects during the procedure, as well as amnesia, satisfaction and time to discharge after the procedure. RESULTS: Both drug regimens had significant sedation scores, amnesia and overall provided patient satisfaction. The treatment of pain was superior in Group A. Respiratory depression of three patients occurred in Group A. The time to discharge was longer in Group M. CONCLUSIONS: Midazolam and midazolam/alfentanil used for sedation anesthesia during prolotherapy and intramuscular stimulation were both effective; however, midazolam alone was the safer approach.

The Sedation Anesthesia for Prolotherapy and Intramuscular Stimulation / 대한통증학회지

BACKGROUND: Painful experiences during procedures such as prolotherapy and intramuscular stimulation are stressful to patients and can affect the treatment outcome. We present a method for relieving pain and increasing the level of patient comfort during the procedure. METHODS: Twenty six patients who requested sedation anesthesia during the procedure were examined. All patients were injected with 500 ml of 0.9% normal saline and were monitored by electrocardiography, blood pressure and pulse oximetry. The patients were supplied with oxygen (3 L/min) through a nasal cannula. Midazolam (0.02 mg/kg) and alfentanil (8 microgram/kg) was injected before the procedure and a bolus injection was administered during the procedure if patients felt any pain. The duration of the procedure, the total amount of drugs, the changes in the systolic blood pressure, heart rate, pulse oxygen saturation, sedation and pain level during procedure, satisfaction scale after the procedure, complications and the incidence of amnesia were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty one patients had a moderate level of sedation, 15 patients did not feel any pain during the procedure, 17 patients had high level of satisfaction (8-10). No patient experienced complications after the procedure, or unstable vital signs, and 6 patients could not remember the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Sedation anesthesia is a safe method for relieving pain during the procedure, and most patients had a high level of satisfaction.