title: Patient controlled sedation using a standard protocol for dressing changes in burns: patients' preference, procedural details and a preliminary safety evaluation.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Patient controlled sedation (PCS) enables patients to titrate doses of drugs by themselves during different procedures involving pain or discomfort.
  
  
  METHODS
  We studied it in a prospective crossover design using a fixed protocol without lockout time to examine it as an alternative method of sedation for changing dressings in burned patients. Eleven patients with >10% total burn surface area (TBSA) had their dressings changed, starting with sedation by an anaesthetist (ACS). The second dressing change was done with PCS (propofol/alfentanil) and the third time the patients had to choose ACS or PCS. During the procedures, data on cardiopulmonary variables, sedation (bispectral index), pain intensity (VAS), procedural details, doses of drugs, and patients' preferences were collected to compare the two sedation techniques.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The study data indicated that wound care in burned patients is feasible with a standardized PCS protocol. The patients preferred PCS to ACS on the basis of self-control, and because they had less discomfort during the recovery period. Wound care was also considered adequate by the staff during PCS. No respiratory (respiratory rate/transcutaneous PCO(2)) or cardiovascular (heart rate/blood pressure) adverse events were recorded at any time during any of the PCS procedures. The doses of propofol and alfentanil and BIS index decrease were less during PCS than ACS. Procedural pain was higher during PCS but lower after the procedure.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  We suggest that PCS using a standard protocol is an interesting alternative to anaesthetist-provided sedation during dressing changes. It seems effective, saves resources, is safe, and at same time is preferred by the patients. The strength of these conclusions is, however, hampered by the small size of this investigation and therefore further studies are warranted.
authors.affiliation: Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Division of Perioperative Medicine, Linköping University Hospital, 581 85 Linköping, Sweden. andreas.nilsson@lio.se
authors.forename: Andreas
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Nilsson
authors.forename: Ingrid
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Steinvall
authors.forename: Zoltan
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Bak
authors.forename: Folke
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Sjöberg
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D015760:Alfentanil / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D016058:Analgesia, Patient-Controlled / Q000379:methods*; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D018686:Anesthetics, Intravenous / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D016292:Procedural Sedation; D018592:Cross-Over Studies; D004334:Drug Administration Schedule; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D015742:Propofol / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D011446:Prospective Studies
chemical_list: D018686:Anesthetics, Intravenous; D015760:Alfentanil; D015742:Propofol