Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us

Clinical Medicine Journal

  • ClinMed Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About ClinMed
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
RCP Journals
Home
  • Log in
  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us
Advanced

Clinical Medicine Journal

clinmedicine Logo
  • ClinMed Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About ClinMed
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

Safe sedation for the non-anaesthetist 

Hakeem Yusuff, Amit Prakash and Stephen Webb
Download PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.16-2-161
Clin Med April 2016
Hakeem Yusuff
AAnaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Health Education North West, Manchester, UK
Roles: specialty registrar
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Amit Prakash
BAddenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge, UK
Roles: consultant anaesthetist
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen Webb
CPapworth Hospital, Cambridge, UK
Roles: consultant cardiothoracic anaesthesia and intensive care medicine
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: stephen.webb@nhs.net
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

ABSTRACT

Sedation has become an essential part of many invasive medical procedures. However, over the years, there have been concerns about the safety of sedation techniques. Various combinations of drug-based and non-drug-based approaches are used for procedural sedation depending on patient factors and the anticipated discomfort associated with each procedure. The common denominator for successful practice for a sedationist is knowledge, adequate training and a mechanism for revalidation.

KEYWORDS
  • Sedation
  • monitoring
  • capnography
  • training

Introduction

The term ‘conscious sedation’ has been used to describe the level of sedation that can be safely administered in settings outside the operating theatre by appropriately trained individuals. It describes a technique in which the use of a drug or drugs produces a state of depression of the central nervous system that enables treatment to be carried out, but during which verbal contact with the patient is maintained throughout the period of sedation. The drugs and techniques used to provide conscious sedation should carry a margin of safety wide enough to render loss of consciousness unlikely.1 This review summarises the key points presented at the RCP’s medical conference titled ‘Safe sedation for the non-anaesthetist’ on 4 June 2015.

Pharmacology (Dr Joe Arrowsmith)

Sedative drugs are usually administered orally, intravenously or via inhalation. If using the intravenous or inhalational routes, the drugs used can and must be titrated to effect (see below). It is preferable to use single drugs because they are easier to titrate to effect and safer than concurrent administration of two or more drugs. Drugs in combination typically produce synergistic effects, and differ in times to onset and peak effect, and hence can be unpredictable or difficult to titrate to effect. Safety margins can be narrowed, increasing the likelihood of overdose, loss of consciousness, respiratory depression and the need for airway interventions.1 However, for painful procedures, it is often necessary to combine a sedative agent with an analgesic agent in the form of either an intravenous opiate or local anaesthesia. Here we describe the traditional and newer agents used for sedation.

Midazolam is the most widely used benzodiazepine for procedural sedation. It can be used on its own or in combination with an opioid (eg fentanyl). It has a shorter half-life than the other benzodiazepines (2–3 h); the peak effect occurs 12–15 min after administration and it has no active metabolites. An initial bolus of 1–3 mg is given intravenously initially and titrated to effect with 0.5 mg boluses to a maximum of 5 mg.

Fentanyl is a synthetic opiate that is 100 times more potent than morphine. It has a rapid onset and offset (usually approximately 30 min) when administered in small doses (0.25–0.5 μg/kg). Fentanyl is often used in combination with midazolam, with which it acts synergistically to produce sedation and analgesia. It is important to give the fentanyl first before titrating midazolam to effect.

Propofol is a phenolic derivative that can provide a range of sedation right up to general anaesthesia, depending on the dose. It is best administered as an infusion to produce steady-state plasma concentrations. Propofol has a quick onset and offset and progression from conscious sedation to deep sedation can occur very quickly, especially if boluses are given. There is evidence that use of propofol to provide sedation for long cardiac interventions by appropriately trained practitioners is safe, effective and practical.2

Dexmedetomidine is an α-2 adrenoceptor agonist with analgesic, sympatholytic and anxiolytic effects. It is licenced in the UK for sedation in intensive-care units only, but has been used successfully for procedural sedation in children.3

Patient selection (Dr Libby Haxby)

Inadequate pre-assessment has been a recurring factor in sedation-related adverse events and poor outcomes for all specialties. The elderly, morbidly obese and patients with multiple comorbidities can present with challenges, which might suggest the need to plan for the procedure to be done in theatre and for sedation to be provided by an anaesthetist. Similarly, patients with potential difficult airways as measured by the Mallampati scoring system can be identified, which would be helpful in assessing the practitioners’ ability to manage any airway or respiratory emergencies that might arise.

It is important for sedation practitioners to decide at this stage if they would be able to ventilate the patient or not.1 The pre-operative interview also provides an opportunity to review the patient’s previous experience with sedation, explain the procedure and potential risks and obtain consent. The American Society of Anesthesiologists’ (ASA) classification has been used to classify patients presenting for procedural sedation (Table 1).4 Patients who are ASA I or II are deemed fit for conscious sedation, whereas patients who are ASA III–V must be assessed and discussed with a consultant anaesthetist.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

ASA grading.

Monitoring and equipment (Dr David Whittaker)

Pulse oximetry, non-invasive blood-pressure monitoring and end-tidal CO2 monitoring are the minimum monitoring standard required for conscious sedation.1,5 Electrocardiographic monitoring should be added in complex procedures, in patients with underlying heart disease and in patients with multiple comorbidities. Translating from anaesthetic practice, there is strong evidence for the addition of end-tidal CO2 monitoring (Fig 1) for detection of early apnoea detection and indirect monitoring of cardiac ouput.6 The information provided is used in combination with periodic clinical assessments to ensure the patient is appropriately sedated with cardiovascular and respiratory function maintained. The bispectral index monitor has the potential to contribute to reduction in sedative doses and early detection of respiratory depression and deeper levels of sedation.7 A recent review of all studies so far was inconclusive and emphasised the need for more studies.8

Fig 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 1.

Oxygen delivery devices with end-tidal CO2 monitoring. Reproduced with permission from www.capnography.com.

Furthermore, emergency equipment – including resuscitation equipment, a continuous high-flow oxygen delivery system, intubation equipment and drugs – should be available. As far as possible, procedural sedation should be undertaken on a tipping trolley to facilitate emergency management of potential aspiration and hypotension.

Recovery and discharge (Dr Liz Williams)

There have been several reports of patients developing cardiorespiratory compromise on the ward after procedural sedation. Initial assessment of sedation practice in 2001 by the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges confirmed that excessive use of flumazenil and poor or a lack of appropriate recovery facilities contributed to sedation-related adverse events. It is important that patients receive exactly the same level of monitoring in the recovery phase as they did during the procedure, including end-tidal CO2. Emergency equipment, drugs and high-flow oxygen should be available. Staff involved in the recovery of sedated patients should have the same level of training as operating theatre recovery nurses. The Aldrete scoring system was initially designed to guide recovery nurses in identifying patients who are fit for discharge for ward-based care after general anaesthesia.9 This system has been adapted for patients who have undergone conscious or deep sedation, but does not take into account pain control and postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Training (Dr Kevin Haire)

All sedation practitioners should complete structured training in the safe practice of sedation and basic life-support skills. For conscious sedation, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s guidelines10 recommend that at least one member of the team performing the procedure requiring sedation must have intermediate life support skills. Simulation has been used as a tool to facilitate training in sedation and management of common clinical emergencies, including human factors.11 Medical specialties that have sedation as a core competency have developed specialty-specific accredited training, which is assessed at the annual review of competency progression. Trained sedation practitioners should undergo regular review and appraisals and aim to undertake 12 hours of continuing-professional development every 5 years.

Conclusion

Sedation-related adverse events have been in the limelight lately (eg Michael Jackson, Joan Rivers) and investigations have highlighted several factors that suggest an attitude of complacency. In response to this, there has been a focus on the need to standardise sedation practice, which has increased the profile of sedation practice among both patients and healthcare staff. Particular attention to training of personnel, pre-sedation assessment, monitoring and recovery has led to a drop in the incidence of adverse events. Additionally clinical governance processes, including clinical audit and incident reporting, have helped to ensure that opportunities for improvements are identified.

  • © 2016 Royal College of Physicians

References

  1. ↵
    1. UK Academy of Medical Royal Colleges
    . Implementing and ensuring safe sedation practice for healthcare procedures in adults. London: Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, 2013.
  2. ↵
    1. Salukhe TV
    , Willems S, Derewitz I, et al. Propofol sedation administered by cardiologists without assisted ventilation for long cardiac interventions. Europace 2012;14:325–30.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. McMorrow SP
    , Abramo TJ. Dexmedetomidine sedation: uses in pediatric procedural sedation outside the operating room. Pediatr Emerg Care 2012;28:292–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. American Society of Anesthesiologists
    . ASA Physical Status Classification System. Schaumburg, IL: ASA, 2014. Available online at www.asahq.org/resources/clinical-information/asa-physical-status-classification-system [Accessed 29 February 2016].
  5. ↵
    1. Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain & Ireland
    . AAGBI safety statement. The use of capnography outside the operating theatre. London: AAGBI, 2011.
  6. ↵
    1. Soto RG
    , Fu ES, Vila H, Miguel RV. Capnography accurately detects apnoea during monitored anaesthesia care. Anaeth Analg 2004;99:379–82.
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. Miner JR
    , Biros MH, Seigel T, Ross K. The utility of the bispectral index in procedural sedation with propofol in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 2005;12:190–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Williams A
    , Ruddock Y. The use of bispectral index monitoring (BIS) in conscious sedation. Emerg Med J 2015;32:414–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Aldrete JA
    , Kroulik D. A postanesthetic recovery score. Anesth Analg 1970;49:924–34.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
    . Sedation in children and young children. London: NICE, 2010.
  11. ↵
    1. Boet S
    , Bould D, Fung L, et al. Transfer of learning and patient outcome in simulated crisis resource management: a systematic review. Can J Anaesthesia 2014;61:571–82.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Aldrete JA.
    The post anesthesia recovery score revisited. J Clin Anesth 1995;7:89–91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Previous articleNext article

Article Tools

Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Safe sedation for the non-anaesthetist 
Hakeem Yusuff, Amit Prakash, Stephen Webb
Clinical Medicine Apr 2016, 16 (2) 161-163; DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.16-2-161

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Safe sedation for the non-anaesthetist 
Hakeem Yusuff, Amit Prakash, Stephen Webb
Clinical Medicine Apr 2016, 16 (2) 161-163; DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.16-2-161
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • Introduction
    • Pharmacology (Dr Joe Arrowsmith)
    • Patient selection (Dr Libby Haxby)
    • Monitoring and equipment (Dr David Whittaker)
    • Recovery and discharge (Dr Liz Williams)
    • Training (Dr Kevin Haire)
    • Conclusion
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • From FOBt to FIT: making it work for patients and populations
  • Hypertension – state of the art 2017
  • The late medical effects of cancer treatments: a growing challenge for all medical professionals
Show more Conference report

Similar Articles

Navigate this Journal

  • Journal Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive

Related Links

  • ClinMed - Home
  • FHJ - Home
clinmedicine Footer Logo
  • Home
  • Journals
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
HighWire Press, Inc.

Follow Us:

  • Follow HighWire Origins on Twitter
  • Visit HighWire Origins on Facebook

Copyright © 2021 by the Royal College of Physicians