Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1996 Oct;43(10):1014-8.
doi: 10.1007/BF03011902.

Patient-controlled propofol sedation for elderly patients: safety and patient attitude toward control

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Patient-controlled propofol sedation for elderly patients: safety and patient attitude toward control

I A Herrick et al. Can J Anaesth. 1996 Oct.

Abstract

Purpose: Little information is available regarding the use of patient-controlled sedation (PCS) among elderly patients undergoing operative procedures under local or regional anaesthesia. This prospective, randomized study evaluated the safety of propofol PCS, and the attitude among elderly patients toward self-administration of sedation during cataract surgery.

Methods: Prospective, randomized study conducted in a University affiliated, tertiary-care hospital. Fifty-five elderly patients (aged 65-79 yr) were randomized to receive propofol patient-controlled sedation (PCS) (n = 28) or no intraoperative sedation (n = 27) during cataract surgery performed under peribulbar block. The PCS parameters consisted of a lockout interval of three minutes and a PCS dose of 0.3 mg.kg-1. Study groups were compared with respect to sedation, anxiety and discomfort visual analogue scores (VAS), cognitive functioning, patient satisfaction and the incidence of intraoperative complications.

Results: Patients in the PCS group administered a mean propofol dose of 65 +/- 49 mg during procedures with a mean duration of 46 min. The incidence of intraoperative complications and sedation, anxiety and discomfort VAS were similar between groups. Patient satisfaction with PCS was high. In the PCS group, 10 (35%) of the 28 patients did not use the device because they were comfortable and did not feel they needed sedation. Satisfaction was higher in the PCS group (P = 0.02), whether or not they used the PCS device, compared with patients who did not receive a PCS device.

Conclusions: Propofol PCS represents a safe sedation technique among elderly patients in a monitored care setting. Elderly patients appear to prefer the option of receiving some form of intraoperative sedation and respond favourably to the opportunity to control administration.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Anaesthesia. 1991 Feb;46(2):90-2 - PubMed
    1. CMAJ. 1991 Feb 15;144(4):425-31 - PubMed
    1. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1987 Nov;35(11):996-1000 - PubMed
    1. Anaesthesia. 1991 Jul;46(7):553-6 - PubMed
    1. Anaesthesia. 1992 Aug;47(8):683-5 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources