RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate pain management practices in the emergency departments (EDs) in Turkey and to evaluate the prevalence and etiologies of oligoanalgesia to identify possible improvement strategies. METHODS: This multicenter cross-sectional observational study was conducted in 10 tertiary care hospitals in Turkey. Patients who were admitted to the ED with pain chief complaints were included in the study. Both patients and physicians were surveyed with two separate forms by the research associates, respectively. The patient survey collected data about the pain and the interventions from the patients' perspective. The pain was evaluated using the Numerical Rating Scale. The physician survey collected data to assess the differences between study centers on pain management strategies and physician attitudes in pain management. RESULTS: Ten emergency physicians and 740 patients (male/female: 365/375) enrolled in the study. The median pain score at admission at both triage and ED was 7 (interquartile range: 5-8). The most frequent type of pain at admission was headache (n = 184, 24.7%). The most common analgesics ordered by physicians were nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (n = 505, 67.9%), and the most frequent route of administration was intramuscular injection (n = 396, 53.2%). About half of the patients (n = 366, 49.2%) received analgesics 10-30 min from ED admission. The posttreatment median pain score decreased to 3 (P < 0.001). About 79.2% of patients did not need a second analgesic administration (n = 589), and opioid analgesics were the most frequently administered analgesic if the second application was required. Physicians prescribed an analgesic at discharge from the ED in 55.6% of the patients (n = 414) and acute pain was present in 7.5% (n = 56) of the patients. CONCLUSION: Our study on the pain management practices in the EDs in Turkey suggested that high rate of intramuscular analgesic use and long emergency room stay durations are issues that should constitute the focus of our quality improvement efforts in pain management.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of this study was to report the vital signs, hemodynamic parameters and pain scores of the patients who have received procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) with either ketofol (combination of ketamine and propofol) or etofen (combination of etomidate and fentanyl) and compare the proportion of patients with airway or respiratory adverse events (AEs) requiring an intervention and calculate the relative risk of AEs with each combination. METHODS: This study is a prospective observational study with survey analysis. All patients received procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) with either ketofol (combination of ketamine and propofol) or etofen (combination of etomidate and fentanyl) were prospectively observed. Vital and hemodynamic parameters and pain scores of the patients were recorded by automated equipment and visual analog scale (VAS) charts. RESULTS: 112 patients were enrolled, 55 received ketofol and 57 received etofen. All patients with a respiratory AE (n = 27) observed to receive a respiratory intervention. Respiratory AE rate and proportion of patient who required a respiratory intervention were significantly higher with ketofol (p = 0.0029). Overall AE rate, and rates of desaturation, emergence reaction were also significantly higher in ketofol group. CONCLUSION: Etofen is a promising combination for the PSA of adult patients with lower respiratory AE and intervention rates and with better hemodynamic profile.