Chang De-Hua, Hiss Sonja, Herich Lena, Becker Ingrid, Mammadov Kamal, Franke Mareike, Mpotsaris Anastasios, Kleinert Robert, Persigehl Thorsten, Maintz David, Bangard Christopher
Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Institute of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Epidemiology, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015 Jul 7;9:943-9. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S80330. eCollection 2015.
The aim of the study reported here was to evaluate patients' satisfaction with implantation of venous access devices under local anesthesia (LA) with and without additional oral sedation.
A total of 77 patients were enrolled in the prospective descriptive study over a period of 6 months. Subcutaneous implantable venous access devices through the subclavian vein were routinely implanted under LA. Patients were offered an additional oral sedative (lorazepam) before each procedure. The level of anxiety/tension, the intensity of pain, and patients' satisfaction were evaluated before and immediately after the procedure using a visual analog scale (ranging from 0 to 10) with a standardized questionnaire.
Patients' satisfaction with the procedure was high (mean: 1.3±2.0) with no significant difference between the group with premedication and the group with LA alone (P=0.54). However, seven out of 30 patients (23.3%) in the group that received premedication would not undergo the same procedure without general anesthesia. There was no significant influence of lorazepam on the intensity of pain (P=0.88). In 12 out of 30 patients (40%) in the premedication group, the level of tension was higher than 5 on the visual analog scale during the procedure. In 21 out of 77 patients (27.3%), the estimate of the level of tension differed between the interventionist and the patient by 3 or more points in 21 out of 77 patients (27.3%).
Overall patient satisfaction is high for implantation of venous access devices under LA. A combination of LA with lorazepam administered orally might not be adequate for patients with a high level of anxiety and tension. The level of tension is often underestimated by the interventionist. Pre-procedural standardized questionnaires could be used to identify patients for whom a gradual approach of individualized sedation may be more effective.
本研究旨在评估患者对在局部麻醉(LA)下植入静脉通路装置的满意度,以及有无额外口服镇静剂的影响。
在6个月的时间里,共有77例患者纳入了这项前瞻性描述性研究。通过锁骨下静脉常规植入皮下可植入静脉通路装置,手术在局部麻醉下进行。每次手术前,患者可额外服用口服镇静剂(劳拉西泮)。使用视觉模拟量表(范围为0至10)和标准化问卷,在手术前和手术后立即评估焦虑/紧张程度、疼痛强度和患者满意度。
患者对手术的满意度较高(平均值:1.3±2.0),术前用药组和单纯局部麻醉组之间无显著差异(P = 0.54)。然而,在接受术前用药的30例患者中,有7例(23.3%)表示若不进行全身麻醉,就不会接受相同的手术。劳拉西泮对疼痛强度无显著影响(P = 0.88)。在术前用药组的30例患者中,有12例(40%)在手术过程中视觉模拟量表上的紧张程度高于5。在77例患者中有21例(27.3%),干预医生和患者对紧张程度的估计相差3分或更多。
总体而言,患者对局部麻醉下植入静脉通路装置的满意度较高。局部麻醉与口服劳拉西泮联合使用,可能不足以应对焦虑和紧张程度较高的患者。干预医生往往会低估紧张程度。术前标准化问卷可用于识别那些采用个体化镇静渐进方法可能更有效的患者。