Etomidate and midazolam for procedural sedation: prospective, randomized trial.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate whether there is a difference in the time of sedation and time to patient disposition in patients undergoing procedural sedation with etomidate and midazolam.


METHODS
Prospective, randomized, double-blind trial comparing etomidate (0.10 mg/kg) and midazolam (0.035 mg/kg) for patients requiring procedural sedation for reduction of joint dislocations or long bone fractures.


RESULTS
Forty-five patients were enrolled (24 randomized to etomidate, 21 to midazolam). Groups were similar in demographics and analgesic dosing. Mean time of sedation for etomidate was 15 minutes (SD, 10.97) and for midazolam was 32 minutes (SD, 16.13) (P<.001). Mean time to disposition for etomidate was 121 minutes (SD, 73.28) and for midazolam was 111 minutes (SD, 96.36) (P=.700). The mean quality of sedation for etomidate was 7.91 (SD, 1.53) and for midazolam was 7.48 (SD, 2.89) (P=.570).


CONCLUSIONS
The use of etomidate compared with midazolam for procedural sedation provides a significant reduction in recovery time, without a reduction in time to patient disposition, while providing equal sedation quality.
Hunt
Gregory S
GS
Department of Emergency Medicine, St. Luke's Hospital, New Bedford, MA 02740, USA.
Spencer
Matthew T
MT
Hays
Daniel P
DP
D000328:Adult; D016292:Procedural Sedation; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D005045:Etomidate; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D006993:Hypnotics and Sedatives; D008297:Male; D008874:Midazolam; D008875:Middle Aged; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013997:Time Factors
D006993:Hypnotics and Sedatives; D008874:Midazolam; D005045:Etomidate