Abstract 359: Unit-Specific Influences on Conscious Sedation Nursing Practices: Comparing Medication Utilization and Patient Outcomes
Background: Unit-Specific influences may determine the amount of sedation given to patients and lead to deviations in patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes due to vague guidelines (4). This study aims to compare medication utilization, clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction in order to determine safety and efficacy of nurse administrated conscious sedation.
Methods: Data from outpatient procedures in Cardiac Catherization Lab (Cath Lab) and Interventional Radiology (IR) departments were collected including comorbidities, labs, procedural characteristics, clinical outcomes, and post-sedation questionnaires.
Results: Mean age was 63 ± 14 years and 124 (54.9%) were males. Cath Lab n=132 and IR n=94. Procedure duration(min) was found to be longer in the Cath Lab 55 (37,81), than in IR 24 (16,45), p-value of <0.001. The American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) scores of Cath Lab 26(21%), IR 29(30.9%), p-value (0.1). Total amount of versed (mg) given in the Cath Lab 2 (1,2), significantly less than IR 3 (1,4.5) with a p-value of <0.01. Total amount of fentanyl (mcg) for Cath Lab 50(50,100), and IR 100 (50,100) with a p-value of <0.01. Median time between 1stand 2nddose of versed in Cath Lab 0 (0,1), IR 9 (5, 16). Median time between 2ndand 3rddose of versed for Cath Lab 0 (0,0), IR 6 (0,13.5) with a p-value <0.001. Median time between 1stand 2nddose of fentanyl in Cath Lab 1 (0,14.8), IR 12.5 (6.8, 24) with a p-value <0.001. Median time between 2ndand 3rddose of fentanyl for Cath Lab 0 (0,0), IR 0,(0,15), p-value <0.001. Median second dose of versed in Cath Lab 0 (0,1), IR 1 (1,1). Median second dose of fentanyl in Cath Lab 25 0 (0,25), IR 25 (25,50), p-value <0.001. Post-Sedation Questionnaire completed by 57 patients, Cath Lab n=30, IR n=27. Patients that felt uncomfortable during their procedure in Cath Lab 11(36.7%), compared to IR 1 (3.7%). The choice of sedation that patient would choose if undergoing a similar procedure again if under general anesthesia Cath Lab 6(20%), IR 0(0%), p-value 0.03. Patients stated that they would recommend conscious sedation to others based on their previous experience, Cath Lab 24 (80%), IR 27(100%).
Conclusion: Patients receiving conscious sedation while undergoing procedures in both the Cath Lab and IR were found to have no adverse outcomes and were considered safe. The procedural duration of catheterization procedures was significantly longer than IR with no adverse outcomes, but patients in the Cath lab received less sedation medication and were found to be less satisfied with their procedure. Patients from Cath Lab received less initial sedation medication and rarely received an additional dose. Cath Lab patients were more likely to not recommended conscious sedation to others (20%), and 6 (20%) stated they would rather undergo a similar procedure under general anesthesia; 36.7% of Cath Lab patients stated that they were uncomfortable during the procedure.