Suppr超能文献

结肠镜检查镇静的实践模式。

Practice patterns of sedation for colonoscopy.

作者信息

Childers Ryan E, Williams J Lucas, Sonnenberg Amnon

机构信息

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.

出版信息

Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Sep;82(3):503-11. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.041. Epub 2015 Apr 4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Sedative and analgesic medications have been used routinely for decades to provide patient comfort, reduce procedure time, and improve examination quality during colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate trends of sedation during colonoscopy in the United States.

SETTING

Endoscopic data repository of U.S. gastroenterology practices (Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative, CORI database from 2000 until 2013).

PATIENTS

The study population was made up of patients undergoing a total of 1,385,436 colonoscopies.

INTERVENTIONS

Colonoscopy without any intervention or with mucosal biopsy, polypectomy, various means of hemostasis, luminal dilation, stent placement, or ablation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Dose of midazolam, diazepam, fentanyl, meperidine, diphenhydramine, promethazine, and propofol used for sedation during colonoscopy.

RESULTS

During the past 14 years, midazolam, fentanyl, and propofol have become the most commonly used sedatives for colonoscopy. Except for benzodiazepines, which were dosed higher in women than men, equal doses of sedation were given to female and male patients. White patients were given higher doses than other ethnic groups undergoing sedation for colonoscopy. Except for histamine-1 receptor antagonists, all sedative medications were given at lower doses to patients with increasing age. The dose of sedatives was higher in colonoscopies associated with procedural interventions or of long duration.

LIMITATIONS

Potential for incomplete or incorrect documentation in the database.

CONCLUSION

The findings reflect on colonoscopy practice in the United States during the last 14 years and provide an incentive for future research on how sex and ethnicity influence sedation practices.

摘要

背景

几十年来,镇静和镇痛药物一直被常规使用,以在结肠镜检查期间让患者感到舒适、缩短检查时间并提高检查质量。

目的

评估美国结肠镜检查期间的镇静趋势。

地点

美国胃肠病学实践的内镜数据存储库(临床结果研究倡议组织,2000年至2013年的CORI数据库)。

患者

研究人群由总共接受1385436次结肠镜检查的患者组成。

干预措施

未进行任何干预或进行黏膜活检、息肉切除术、各种止血方法、管腔扩张、支架置入或消融的结肠镜检查。

主要观察指标

结肠镜检查期间用于镇静的咪达唑仑、地西泮、芬太尼、哌替啶、苯海拉明、异丙嗪和丙泊酚的剂量。

结果

在过去14年中,咪达唑仑、芬太尼和丙泊酚已成为结肠镜检查中最常用的镇静剂。除了女性使用苯二氮䓬类药物的剂量高于男性外,男性和女性患者接受的镇静剂量相等。白人患者接受的镇静剂量高于其他接受结肠镜检查镇静的种族群体。除组胺-1受体拮抗剂外,所有镇静药物给予年龄较大患者的剂量较低。与操作干预或持续时间较长的结肠镜检查相关的镇静剂剂量较高。

局限性

数据库中可能存在记录不完整或不正确的情况。

结论

这些发现反映了过去14年美国的结肠镜检查实践,并为未来关于性别和种族如何影响镇静实践的研究提供了动力。

相似文献

1
Practice patterns of sedation for colonoscopy.
Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Sep;82(3):503-11. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.041. Epub 2015 Apr 4.
3
Superiority of split dose midazolam as conscious sedation for outpatient colonoscopy.
World J Gastroenterol. 2009 Aug 14;15(30):3783-7. doi: 10.3748/wjg.15.3783.
5
[Utility of routine use of reversion after sedation in outpatient colonoscopy].
Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005 Jan;28(1):10-4. doi: 10.1157/13070377.
6
Propofol versus midazolam and meperidine for conscious sedation in GI endoscopy.
Am J Gastroenterol. 2000 Jun;95(6):1476-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2000.02080.x.
7
Economic benefits of remimazolam compared to midazolam and propofol for procedural sedation in colonoscopies and bronchoscopies.
Curr Med Res Opin. 2023 May;39(5):691-699. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2023.2196198. Epub 2023 Apr 11.
9
Impact of fellowship training level on colonoscopy quality and efficiency metrics.
Gastrointest Endosc. 2018 Aug;88(2):378-387. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.04.2338. Epub 2018 Apr 19.

引用本文的文献

2
Sex-Dependent Differences in Colonoscopy Sedation: Protocol for a Scoping Review.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2025 Oct;69(9):e70051. doi: 10.1111/aas.70051.
5
Propofol sedation does not improve measures of colonoscopy quality but increase cost - findings from a large population-based cohort study.
EClinicalMedicine. 2024 Mar 9;70:102503. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102503. eCollection 2024 Apr.
7
Advances in Analgosedation and Periprocedural Care for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
Life (Basel). 2023 Feb 8;13(2):473. doi: 10.3390/life13020473.
8
Interpreting the results from the first randomised controlled trial of colonoscopy: does it save lives?
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2023 Oct;28(5):306-308. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2022-112155. Epub 2023 Feb 8.
10
Effect of visual distraction on pain in adults undergoing colonoscopy: a meta-analysis.
Surg Endosc. 2023 Apr;37(4):2633-2643. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09724-7. Epub 2022 Nov 11.

本文引用的文献

1
Cost-effectiveness analysis of a colonoscopy screening navigator program designed for Hispanic men.
J Cancer Educ. 2015 Jun;30(2):260-7. doi: 10.1007/s13187-014-0718-7.
4
Factors explaining racial/ethnic disparities in rates of physician recommendation for colorectal cancer screening.
Am J Public Health. 2013 Jul;103(7):e91-9. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.301034. Epub 2013 May 16.
6
A national study of racial differences in pain screening rates in the VA health care system.
Clin J Pain. 2013 Feb;29(2):118-23. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e31826a86ae.
7
Identifying barriers to colonoscopy screening for nonadherent African American participants in a patient navigation intervention.
Health Educ Behav. 2013 Aug;40(4):449-57. doi: 10.1177/1090198112459514. Epub 2012 Oct 19.
8
Endoscopy in the elderly.
Am J Gastroenterol. 2012 Oct;107(10):1495-501; quiz 1494, 1502. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2012.246. Epub 2012 Aug 7.
9
Using colorectal trends in the U.S. to identify unmet primary care needs of vulnerable populations.
Prev Med. 2012 Aug;55(2):131-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.05.016. Epub 2012 May 30.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验