Correlation between precise and simple tests in recovery of dynamic balance function after intravenous sedation with midazolam in the elderly

Purpose Assessing the recovery of dynamic balance after intravenous sedation in the elderly is important for ensuring their safe discharge, especially when they are walking. A reliable, simple dynamic balance test would be useful in daily clinical practice. We observed the recovery of balance after intravenous sedation with midazolam, using computerized dynamic posturography (CDP), and we evaluated the correlation between the CDP result and the results of simple dynamic balance tests. Methods Midazolam was administered in divided doses, until the Wilson sedation score reached 3, in 18 elderly male volunteers. The dynamic balance test using CDP with perturbation stimuli was performed before and after sedation. As simple dynamic balance tests, the usual-speed walking (USW) and maximum-speed walking (MSW) tests and a modified timed “up and go” (TUG) test (subjects stand up from a chair, walk 5 m forward and return to the chair with MSW, and sit down again) were performed. Results The recovery times (defined as the time until the significant difference between the value at each time point and the baseline value disappeared) in the dynamic balance test (CDP), USW test, MSW test, and TUG test, were 80, 40, 80, 80 min, respectively. There was a significant, strong positive correlation between the result of the dynamic balance test (CDP) and the TUG test (P < 0.01; r = 0.70). Conclusion The TUG test is a useful simple dynamic balance/motor test that can be used in daily clinical practice in the elderly.     

老年人脑电双频指数、咪达唑仑血药浓度与镇静深度的相关性研究

目的 探讨老年人手术病人椎管内麻醉后用咪达唑仑镇静,脑电双频谱指数、咪达唑仑血药浓度和镇静深度间的相关关系。方法 44例ASAⅠ-Ⅱ级择期手术病人,不用术前药。分为老年组（61－82岁）和年轻组（19－43岁）,每组22例。为尽快达到稳态血药浓度,采用靶控输注. 咪达唑仑靶浓度从50ng/ml起渐增,直至病人对轻推无反应（意识消失）,每个浓度维持15min。连续记录EEG参数,在每一稳态血药浓度末,记录BIS、95％SEF,桡动脉取血（高效液相色谱法测定咪达唑仑血药浓度,并评定镇静深度（OAA／S评分法）。用Spearman’s等级相关进行相关分析,并计算预测概率（Pk）值。结果 两组BIS（r=0.935-0.955)与镇静水平的相关性优于血药浓度（r=-0.849～-0.870）和95％SEF（(r=0.503-0.571).BIS的Pk值高（0．942－0．972）。在同一镇静评分(OAA/S4-1时）,老年组BIS值明显高于年轻组（P＜0．01）,而血药浓度低于年轻组。结论 BIS在监测咪达唑仑镇静水平及预测意识消失方面有重要价值。在同一镇静评分时,老年人BIS值高于年轻人。     

靶控输注咪达唑仑镇静时老年和年轻患者心率变异性的变化

目的 观察靶控输注咪达唑仑镇静时老年手术患者和年轻患者心率变异性（HRV）的变化。方法 38例ASAI-Ⅱ级择期椎管内麻醉下行下肢或下腹部手术患者，分为老年组（60－82岁）和年轻组（18－40岁），每组19例。采用靶控输注，靶浓度从50ng/ml起渐增，直至病人OAA／S评分为1级。观察镇静起效期和恢复期不同OAA／S评分时，两组HRV参数等的变化。结果 随咪达唑仑镇静程度加深，两组患者LF、nuLF、LF／HF、TP和HRV逐渐降低，nuHF升高，HF无明显改变。随镇静作用减退，HRV参数逐渐恢复至基础值。LF、LF／HF、TP和HRV与镇静评分的相关性较好（r=0.502-0.719)。两组总体变化趋势一致。相同镇静评分时，绝大多数HRV参数值老年组与年轻组无显著性差异，仅在深度镇静（OAA／S1级）时，老年组HRV各值均显著低于年轻组（除外LF／HF）。结论 深度镇静（OAA／S1级）时，咪达唑仑对老年患者自主神经活性的抑制较年轻患者显著，但对没有心血管和自主神经系统疾病的老年手术患者交感－副交感神经均衡性的维持与年轻患者无明显差异。     

咪达唑仑、丙泊酚复合舒芬太尼清醒镇静在整形外科手术中的应用

目的 观察咪达唑仑、丙泊酚复合舒芬太尼清醒镇静在短小整形外科手术中的应用.方法 采用完全随机分组法选取2009年1月至2010年1月,中国医学科学院整形外科医院81例拟在清醒镇静下行整形外科手术的患者,静脉注射咪达唑仑0.05 mmg· kg-和舒芬太尼0.1 ug·kg-1后,连续输注咪达唑仑、丙泊酚、舒芬太尼复合液(咪达唑仑5 mmg+丙泊酚200 mg+舒芬太尼10μg,共计23 ml).输注初始速度为0.2 ml·kg-1 ·h-1,其后根据OAA/S评分调节输注速度,每次增加20％,维持镇静深度在OAA/S评分11分左右.记录患者的血流动力学和呼吸的变化、并发症(低氧血症、呼吸暂停、躁动、恶心呕吐)、麻醉时间和各药物的用量.术毕前5～10 min停止药物输注,术后次日随访患者对麻醉处理的满意度,以及今后类似手术是否愿意选择相同的麻醉方法.结果 静脉注射咪达唑仑、舒芬太尼后,OAA/S评分从20.0±0下降至11.9±2.6(P ＜0.05),术中维持在10.5～11.1,手术结束时恢复至16.0±2.2,但仍明显低于术前基础值(P＜0.05).镇静诱导后SBP、DBP明显下降(P＜0.05),HR无明显改变(P＞0.05),手术结束时恢复至术前水平(P＞0.05).术中有11例次出现低氧血症,5例次出现呼吸暂停,2例躁动明显,但均未出现恶心呕吐现象.麻醉时间为(101.1±42.5) min,咪达唑仑、丙泊酚和舒芬太尼用量分别为(8.4±3.7) mg、(189.1±88.7) mg和(18.2±5.6)μg.术后次日随访,96％(78/81)的患者对麻醉表示满意,并愿意再次接受相同的麻醉处理.结论 咪达唑仑、丙泊酚复合舒芬太尼清醒镇静适用于短小整形外科手术的麻醉,镇静、镇痛效果确切,患者舒适度高、恢复快.     

外科重症病人脑电双频指数指导靶控输注咪达唑仑的镇静效果

目的评价外科重症监护病房(SICU)病人脑电双频指数(BIS)指导靶控输注(TCI)咪达唑仑的镇静效果。方法SICU病人30例,随机分为3组(n=10):A组采用恒速输注咪达唑仑0．06 mg·kg-1·h-1镇静;B组采用咪达唑仑TCI镇静,初始血浆靶浓度为60 ng/ml;C组在BIS指导下咪达唑仑TCI镇静,初始血浆靶浓度为60 ng／ml。每30 min采用Ramsay镇静评分评估镇静深度,若Ramsay镇静评分小于或大于4分,则A组输注速率增加或减少0．02 mg·kg-1·h-1,B组血浆靶浓度增加或减少20 ng／ml。C组若BIS大于或小于70,则血浆靶浓度增加或减少20 ng／ml。B、C组均随机抽取30份2 ml动脉血样,测定咪达唑仑血药浓度,用偏离性和精密度评价TCI系统的性能。结果咪达唑仑TCI系统的偏离性为12．5％,精密度为22．5％。咪达唑仑实测血药浓度与Ramsay镇静评分的相关系数为0．67(P<0．05)。镇静过程中C组Ramsay镇静评分4分所占比例(54％)高于A组(28％)和B组(40％)(P<0．01)。结论咪达唑仑TCI系统的性能可靠,用于SICU病人以BIS为70调控咪达唑仑TCI,可产生良好的镇静效果。     

Assessment of the recovery of dynamic balance after intravenous sedation with midazolam

Purpose To assess street fitness after sedation, computerized dynamic posturography (CDP) involving movement of the center of gravity may be more accurate than the conventional computerized static posturography (CSP). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the recovery of dynamic balance function after intravenous sedation by CDP in comparison with CSP, and to find a simple dynamic balance test that is well correlated with CDP.Methods The subjects were 20 male volunteers aged 20–27 years. After intravenous injection of midazolam (0.07mg·kg^–1), four balance tests were performed. The recovery time and the percentage of subjects showing recovery (difference from the baseline value 10%) were compared. As CDP, a test in which unexpected perturbation stimuli are given using an unstable platform was performed. As CSP, standing sway tests were performed. Maximum speed walking (MSW) and usual speed walking (USW) tests were performed as simple balance tests.Results The recovery time in CDP (80min) was longer than that in CSP (40–60min). The percentage of subjects showing recovery in CDP (20%) was significantly lower than that in CSP (55%–70%) 60min after the administration of midazolam. There was a significant positive correlation between the CDP test and the MSW test (r = 0.67).Conclusion CDP with perturbation stimuli detects the balance inhibitory effects of midazolam with greater sensitivity than CSP. The MSW test is well correlated with CDP with perturbation stimuli.     

右美托咪定和咪达唑仑用于机械通气患者镇静效果的比较

目的 比较右美托咪定和咪达唑仑用于机械通气患者镇静的效果.方法 拟在镇静下行机械通气治疗24 h的重症监护室(ICU)患者60例,年龄20 ～ 64岁,体重指数21 ～ 25 kg/m2,急性生理与慢性健康Ⅱ评分10 ～ 25分,采用随机数字表法,将患者随机分为2组(n=30):咪达唑仑组(M组)和右美托咪定组(D组).M组:静脉注射咪达唑仑0.05 mg/kg负荷量后,以0.03～0.20mg· kg-1·h-1的速率静脉输注;D组:静脉注射右美托咪定1 μg/kg负荷量后,以0.2～0.7μg·kg-1·h-1的速率静脉输注,维持2组Ramsay镇静评分2～4分.记录镇静期间ICU医生对镇静效果的满意度、低血压和心动过缓的发生情况.记录开始镇静至停止镇静后2h谵妄的发生情况、苏醒时间和苏醒后2h内再入睡的发生情况.结果 与M组比较,D组ICU医生对镇静效果的满意度升高,苏醒时间缩短,苏醒后2h内再入睡率和谵妄发生率降低(P＜0.05或0.01),低血压和心动过缓的发生率差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 右美托咪定用于机械通气患者镇静的效果优于咪达唑仑.     

重症患者右美托咪啶和咪达唑仑镇静效果的比较:Meta分析

目的 采用Meta分析比较右美托咪啶和咪达唑仑用于重症患者镇静的效果.方法 检索PubMed、EMbase、Cochrane图书馆、万方数据库、CNKI、VIP等数据库,收集右美托咪啶和咪达唑仑用于重症患者镇静的临床随机对照研究.采用Cochrane协作网系统评价纳入文献的质量,采用Rev-Man 5.0软件对收集的患者资料进行Meta分析.结果 共纳入6项研究,包括613例患者,其中右美托咪啶组385例,咪达唑仑组228例.与咪达唑仑组比较,右美托咪啶组ICU住院时间缩短,机械通气时间、心动过缓、低血压和谵妄的发生率、病死率差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 与咪达唑仑相比,右美托咪啶可缩短ICU住院时间,提示右美托咪啶有利于重症患者的转归.     

数量化脑电参数对异丙酚、咪唑安定或氯胺酮麻醉病人镇静深度监测的准确性

目的评价脑电图双频谱指数(BIS)、95%边缘频率(95%SEF)对异丙酚、咪唑安定或氯胺酮麻醉病人镇静深度监测的准确性。方法择期行胸、腹部手术病人45例,ASAⅠ或Ⅱ级,年龄30-59岁,随机分为3组:异丙酚组(P组)、咪唑安定组(M组)和氯胺酮组(K组),每组15例。P、M、K组分别以8、0.5、4mg·kg-1·h-1的速率静脉输注药物,每3min行进行警觉/镇静(OAA/S)评分一次,直到OAA/S评分达1分停止给药。记录每次评分即刻的BIS及95%SEF。分析BIS、95%SEF与OAA/S评分的相关性,计算病人意识消失时BIS50、95%SEF50、相应95%可信区间及BIS、95%SEF预测镇静深度的概率(Pk)。结果P、M组BIS、95%SEF与OAA/S评分间具有相关性,K组BIS和95%SEF与OAA/S评分间无相关性。P、M组BIS50分别为65.9、70.7,但是无法计算K组相应的BIS50和95%SEF50。P、M组BIS和95%SEF的Pk均高于0.5(P<0.01),K组BIS和95%SEF的Px与0.5比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);P组BIS及95%SE'的Pk均高于M组(P<0.05);P、M组BIS的Pk均高于95%SEF的Pk(P<0.05)。结论BIS和95%SEF可以准确地监测异丙酚的镇静深度,对咪唑安定镇静深度监测的准确性稍差,而对氯胺酮镇静深度无法监测,BIS对麻醉药镇静深度监测的准确性较95%SEF高。     

咪唑安定预先给药对青年和老年病人异丙酚闭环靶控镇静的影响

目的 探讨咪唑安定预先给药对青年和老年病人异丙酚闭环靶控镇静的影响。方法24例青年病人(18-39岁)和24例老年病人(66-79岁),ASAⅠ-Ⅱ级,按照术前给药(安慰剂生理盐水或咪唑安定)不同随机分成4组:青年安慰剂组(YP组)、青年咪唑安定组(YM组)、老年安尉剂组(OP组)、老年咪唑安定组(OM组)。所有病人在硬膜外腔阻滞麻醉下,采用以脑电双频指数(BIS)为反馈的闭环靶控(CLTCI)系统输注异丙酚进行镇静。静脉注射生理盐水或咪唑安定,10min后开始异丙酚CLTCI,开始靶浓度设定为1.5μg/ml,然后每min逐步增加或减少0.5μg/ml,直到患者的镇静深度稳定于警觉镇静评分(OAAM/S)3分以下。此时的BIS作为反馈变量,通过CLTCI系统自动输注异丙酚。连续记录血压、心率、脉搏血氧饱和度、BIS,记录异丙酚的诱导用量及总用量、诱导时间(OAAMS达到3分)、清醒时间(OAA/S达到5分)。结果与YM组、OP组相比,YM组、OM组异丙酚的诱导用量及总用量明显减少(P<0.05),诱导时间明显缩短(P<0.05),而清醒时间延长(P<0.05),其中以OM组更为明显(P<0.05)。OM组低血压和呼吸抑制的发生率明显比其它组高。结论预先注射咪唑安定减少闭环靶控镇静异丙酚的用量,老年病人尤为明显,并增加老年病人异丙酚闭环靶控镇静时低血压、呼吸抑制的发生率。     

靶控输注咪达唑仑系统用于术中镇静临床效能的评价

目的 评估靶控输注（TCI）咪达唑仑镇静系统的临床效能。方法 44例ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级、择期椎管内麻醉下手术病人,分为老年组（61～82岁）和年轻组（19～43岁）,每组22例。微机联接佳士比3500输液泵,选用Stelpump控制程序中Avram等的药代参数。咪达唑仑TCI镇静的靶目标为效应部位药物浓度。咪达唑仑靶浓度从50ng·ml-1起渐增,直至病人对轻推无反应（定义为意识消失）。每个靶浓度维持15min。每组随机选取10例病人,在每一输注阶段的第10分钟和第15分钟经桡动脉取血,以高效液相色谱法测定咪达唑仑的血药浓度。结果 咪达唑仑TCI系统的偏离性老年组（7.9％）略低于年轻组（11.6％）,精确度两组都为20.0％,均在临床应用可接收范围内。结论咪达唑仑TCI系统可安全、有效地用于椎管内麻醉时病人的镇静,无论病人是老年人或年轻人。     

异丙酚和咪达唑仑用于颅脑创伤患者机械通气镇静对垂体前叶激素影响的比较

目的 比较异丙酚和咪达唑仑用于颅脑损伤患者机械通气镇静对垂体前叶激素的影响.方法 ICU颅脑创伤成年患者84例,拟在镇静下行机械通气治疗,采用随机数字表法,将其随机分为2组(n=42):异丙酚组(P组)和咪达唑仑组(M组).P组静脉输注异丙酚1.5～6.0mg· kg-1·h-1,加深镇静时静脉注射异丙酚50 mg;M组静脉输注咪达唑仑0.10～0.35 mg·kg-1·h-1,加深镇静时静脉注射咪达唑仑7.5 mg.维持Ramsay镇静评分2～4分,行机械通气72～120 h.记录镇静前格拉斯哥昏迷评分、入ICU后4周格拉斯哥预后评分,于镇静24、72 h时和入ICU后4周采集静脉血样,采用ELISA法测定血清皮质醇(COR)、促甲状腺激素(TSH)、泌乳素(PRL)和生长激素(GH)水平.结果 与M组比较,P组镇静24、72 h时血清COR和GH水平降低,TSH水平升高(P＜0.05或0.01),而以上指标水平均维持于正常范围.2组PRL水平及预后良好率之间差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 异丙酚与咪达唑仑用于颅脑创伤患者机械通气镇静对垂体前叶内分泌功能的影响无显著差异.     

丙泊酚和雷米芬太尼用于乳腺活检清醒镇静的效果比较

目的比较丙泊酚和雷米芬太尼用于乳腺活检手术清醒镇静的临床效果。方法择期拟行单侧乳腺活检手术的患者40例,ASAI～Ⅱ级,年龄18～60岁,随机分为丙泊酚组和雷米芬太尼组,各20例。在丙泊酚组,开始输注速度为2mg·kg^-1·h^-1维持5min后,如手术尚未开始则改为1mg·kg^-1·h^-1,手术开始后维持2mg·kg^-1·h^-1至术毕。在雷米芬太尼组,起始输注速度为0．1μg·kg-1·min-1,5min后降为0．05μg·kg-1·min-1,维持至术毕。手术开始时使用1％利多卡因局部浸润麻醉,分别在局麻浸润和深部组织切除时进行疼痛评分（VAS）和清醒麒静评分（OAA／S）。记录术后完全清醒（OAA／S评分为5分）时、术后30min镇痛评分及术后并发症。结果两组在局麻浸润和深部组织切除时的VAS和OAA／S评分差异无统计学意义,术中追加局麻药及SP02〈90％的例数差异无统计学意义。雷米芬太尼组中的7例以及丙泊酚组的1例患者术中RR〈8次／min,经语言唤醒后迅速缓解,组间差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。术后30min镇痛评分和术后恶心发生率组间差异无统计学意义。结论丙泊酚和雷米芬太尼在乳腺活检术中均具有良好的镇静作用,但雷米芬太尼抑制呼吸频率的作用较强。     

纤维支气管镜清醒插管时不同剂量瑞芬太尼复合咪达唑仑的效果

目的观察纤维支气管镜（FOB）清醒插管时不同剂量瑞芬太尼复合咪达唑仑的效果。方法择期气管插管全麻下行手术病人48例,年龄35～45岁,ASA均为Ⅰ级,Mallampati分级为Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,随机分为单纯表面麻醉组（L组）、表面麻醉＋瑞芬太尼0．6μg/kg＋咪达唑仑60μg/kg组（R1组）和表面麻醉＋瑞芬太尼1．0μg/kg＋咪达唑仑60μg/kg组（R2组）,每组16例。3组病人均用1%地卡因行鼻腔、咽喉表面麻醉,R1组和R2组均静脉注射咪达唑仑60μg/kg,3min后两组分别缓慢静脉注射瑞芬太尼0．6μg/kg、1．0μg/kg,1min后采用F1-10P型FOB行气管插管,记录麻醉前（T0）、FOB进入鼻腔或咽腔即刻（T1）、挑起会咽进入声门即刻（T2）、插入气管导管即刻（T3）时的平均动脉压（MAP）、心率（HR）、脉搏血氧饱和度（SpO2）及插管过程中有无躁动、呛咳、恶心等插管反应,术后随访插管过程中病人的知晓情况。结果与T0比较,L组T1、T2时MAP及HR明显升高,R2组T1和T2时SpO2下降,T1时HR明显降低,3组T3时MAP明显降低（P＜0．05）；与L组比较,R1组和R2组T1、T2时MAP降低,T1时HR降低（P＜0．01）；与R1组比较,R2组T1时HR降低,T1、T2时SpO2下降（P＜0．05）。与L组比较,R1组呛咳、躁动及插管知晓发生率明显减少（P＜0．05）,R2组各插管反应及插管知晓发生率明显减少（P＜0．01）；与R1组比较,R2组躁动发生率明显减少（P＜0．05）。结论在表面麻醉的基础上,静脉注射瑞芬太尼1．0μg/kg复合咪达唑仑60μg/kg可为病人FOB清醒插管提供良好的条件。     

咪唑安定-芬太尼-异丙酚顺序静注诱导对患者镇静程度和麻醉深度的影响

目的 研究咪唑安定（Mid）-芬太尼（Fen）-异丙酚（Pro）顺序静注诱导对患者镇静程度、听觉诱发电位指数（AEPindex）、脑电双频谱指数（BIS）和血流动力学的影响。方法 40例（ASA　I-Ⅱ）听力正常患者,采用Mid-Fen-Pro顺序诱导,监测记录诱导前基础值（T0）、静注Mid 0.06mg/kg后1、3、5min（T1、T2、T3）、静注 Fen 4mg/kg后1、3、5min（T4、T5、T6）以及静注Pro后1、3min（T7、T8）等时点AEPindex、BIS、MAP和HR值,并同时行改良OAA/S镇静评级。结果 静注Mid后1～5min患者OAA/S评级迅速下降,37.5％患者意识消失;AEPindex、BIS、MAP值也逐渐下降（与T0相比,P<0.01）。静注Fen后MAP继续下降（T4～6与T0～3相比,P<0.05～0.01）,HR显著下降（T4～6与T3相比,P<0.01）;此期间患者OAA/S评级下降,但AEPindex、BIS无明显变化（T4～6与T3相比,P>0.05）。应用Pro后3min,所有患者OAA/S均降为0;AEPindex、BIS分别降至（28.97±11.03）,（50.38±11.89）,MAP也明显下降（T7、T8与T0～6相比,P<0.05～0.01）。结论Mid-Fen-Pro联合诱导能平稳地诱导麻醉,诱导期间AEPindex,BIS均能准确地反映临床镇静麻醉深度。     

异丙酚靶控输注用于硬膜外麻醉病人清醒镇静的可行性

目的探讨异丙酚靶控输注用于硬膜外麻醉病人清醒镇静的可行性及所需靶控血药浓度.方法50例在硬膜外麻醉下行下腹部及下肢手术病人,以血浆室为靶控目标,予以异丙酚TCI清醒镇静.靶控血药浓度最初设定为0.5μg/ml,在与效应室异丙酚浓度达平衡后3min以0.1μg/ml递增,直至OAA/S评分降至3分,并抽取病人各时点静脉血3mi,采用高效液相色谱分析法测定异丙酚血药浓度,确定不同OAA/S评分时对应靶控血药浓度及其与BIS相关性,评估靶控输注系统的性能.结果预期误差的中位数MDPE=-23.1%,预期误差绝对值的中位数MDAPE=27.6%6,清醒镇静深度(OAA/S评分3分)时所需的异丙酚靶控血药浓度为(1.74±0.13)μg/ml.BIS与TCI血药浓度具有良好的相关性(r=-0.80,P＜0.05).结论异丙酚靶控输注用于硬膜外麻醉病人清醒镇静具有可控性良好,病人镇静深度适宜,血液动力学影响小,适用于临床推广.     

A 2 year experience of nurse led conscious sedation in paediatric burns

Introduction

Ketamine and midazolam have been used safely by anaesthetists in paediatric burns and have a good safety profile. We believed that this could be developed to a nurse led conscious sedation protocol, without direct anaesthetic attendance.

Methods

Two years experience of our technique was retrospectively reviewed. We recorded the age, weight, percentage burn, dose of oral ketamine and midazolam given, time for procedure whether an anaesthetist was called to the sedation room, and the reason for the call.

Results

Data were collected for a total of 45 children undergoing 131 procedures. The age (mean ± SD) was 9.5 ± 4.7 years, the weight (mean ± SD) 38.7 ± 19.8 kg and the percentage burn (mean ± SD) was 25.3 ± 22.9%. The dose of oral ketamine (mean ± SD) was 409.5 ± 252.3mg or 8.78 ± 3.27 mg/kg and the dose of oral midazolam (mean ± SD) was 17.6 ± 8.7 mg or 0.44 ± 0.14 mg/kg. The duration of procedure (mean ± SD) was 97.32 ± 32.90 min. The incidence of the anaesthetist required to administer further sedation was 29.8% of sedations. The decision to convert to general anaesthesia was taken in 2.3% of cases. An anaesthetist was called other than to top up sedation in 6.9% of sedations.

Conclusion

Our protocol for nurse-monitored conscious sedation using oral ketamine and midazolam in the burns patient provides a safe method of analgesic sedation for burn dressing changes.     

年龄对Diprifusor靶控输注用于椎管内麻醉清醒镇静的影响

目的　观察Diprifusor靶控输注 (TCI)用于不同年龄组椎管内麻醉清醒性镇静作用。方法　 4 5例ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级、择期硬膜外麻醉和 /或腰麻的病人 ,按照年龄分为三组 ,每组 1 5例 :成年组 1 9～ 4 5岁、中年组 4 6～ 6 4岁和老年组 6 5～ 80岁。术中以DiprifusorTCI系统行丙泊酚清醒性镇静 ,采用 5分镇静评分法 ,根据病人反应及所需镇静水平调节靶浓度 (Ct)。Ct初设值为 0 4 μg/ml,每次调节量为 0 1 μg/ml,时间间隙不小于 3min。 结果　老年组病人镇静评分为 2、3和 4时丙泊酚Ct的ED50 分别为 0 6 3μg/ml、0 94 μg/ml和 1 2 8μg/ml,低于成年组 1 0 0 μg/ml、1 34μg/ml和1 6 6 μg/ml(P <0 0 1 )和中年组 0 80 μg/ml、1 1 0 μg/ml和 1 5 1 μg/ml(P <0 0 5 )。成年组和中年组的丙泊酚Ct的ED50 比较无显著差异。老年组病人镇静评分达 4时 ,有 5例 (33.3% )出现低血压及心动过缓 ,3例 (2 0 % )出现呼吸抑制 ,都高于成年组和中年组的发生率。结论　DiprifusorTCI系统可以用于椎管内麻醉清醒性镇静。但随着年龄的增加 ,椎管内麻醉清醒性镇静所需丙泊酚Ct降低 ,不良反应增多     

丙泊酚靶控输注在外科ICU病人清醒镇静中的应用

目的探讨丙泊酚靶控输注(TCI)应用于外科ICU(SICU)病人清醒镇静的可行性。方法60例SICU病人随机分成四组:C组使用普通微泵连续输注丙泊酚,2 mg.kg-1.h-1;Ⅰ~Ⅲ组均使用Diprifusor TCI系统输注丙泊酚,TCI浓度分别为0.5、1.0、1.5μg/ml。监测不同时点的脑电双频指数(BIS),记录出现的不良反应,并对所有病人进行镇静/警醒评分。结果Ⅰ组各时点的镇静评分、BIS均高于Ⅱ、Ⅲ组和C组(P<0.05);Ⅱ、Ⅲ组低血压、镇静不足、过度镇静的发生率比C组少(P<0.05);Ⅰ组的镇静不足发生率高于Ⅱ、Ⅲ组(P<0.05)。结论丙泊酚TCI应用于SICU病人清醒镇静对呼吸循环影响小,镇静效果理想,操作便利。     

A randomised controlled trial of paediatric conscious sedation for dental treatment using intravenous midazolam combined with inhaled nitrous oxide or nitrous oxide/sevoflurane

Failure of dental treatment due to anxiety is a common problem in children. The aim of this study was to establish whether the use of a combination of intravenous midazolam with inhalation agents (nitrous oxide alone or in combination with sevoflurane) was any more likely to result in successful completion of treatment than midazolam alone. A further aim was to evaluate the clinical viability of these techniques as an alternative to general anaesthesia. In total, 697 children too anxious for management with relative analgesia and requiring invasive dental procedure for which a general anaesthetic would usually be required, were recruited and randomly assigned to one of three groups given the following interventions: group 1 - a combination of inhaled medical air and titrated intravenous midazolam, group 2 - a combination of inhaled 40% nitrous oxide in oxygen and titrated intravenous midazolam, and group 3 - a combination of an inhaled mixture of sevoflurane 0.3% and nitrous oxide 40% in oxygen with titrated intravenous midazolam. The primary outcome measure was successful completion of the intended dental treatment with a co-operative child responsive to verbal commands. In group 1, 54% (94/174 children) successfully completed treatment. In group 2, 80% (204/256 children) and in group 3, 93% (249/267 children) completed treatment. This difference was significant at the 1% level. Intravenous midazolam, especially in combination with inhaled nitrous oxide or sevoflurane and nitrous oxide, are effective techniques, with the combination of midazolam and sevoflurane the one most likely to result in successful treatment.