FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4247487567> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4247487567 endingPage "937" @default.
• W4247487567 startingPage "931" @default.
• W4247487567 abstract "Although methohexital has been well studied for use in emergency department (ED) procedural sedation (PS), propofol has been evaluated less extensively for ED use.The authors hypothesized that there is no difference in the depth of sedation and the rate of respiratory depression (RD) between propofol and methohexital in PS during the reduction of fractures and dislocations in the ED.This was a randomized prospective study of nonintoxicated adult patients undergoing PS for fracture or dislocation reduction in the ED between July 2001 and March 2002. Patients were randomized to receive either propofol or methohexital, 1 mg/kg intravenously, followed by repeat boluses of 0.5 mg/kg every 2 minutes until adequate sedation was achieved. Doses, vital signs, end-tidal CO(2) (ETCO(2)) by nasal cannulae, pulse oximetry, and bispectral electroencephalogram analysis (BIS) scores were recorded. RD was defined as an ETCO(2) greater than 50 torr, an oxygen saturation less than 90% at any time, or an absent ETCO(2) waveform. After returning to baseline mental status, patients completed three 100-mm visual analog scales (VASs) regarding pain associated with the procedure, recall of the procedure, and satisfaction. RD rates and VAS outcomes were compared with chi-square tests.There were 109 patients enrolled; six were excluded for study protocol violations. Of the remaining 103 patients, 52 received methohexital (reduction successful in 94%) and 51 received propofol (98% successful). No cardiac rhythm abnormalities or significant decline in systolic blood pressure (>20%) was detected. Six patients required bag-valve-mask-assisted ventilations during the procedure, all for less than 1 minute; four of these patients received methohexital, and two received propofol. By the authors' definition, RD was seen in 25 of 52 (48%) patients receiving methohexital and 25 of 51 (49%) patients receiving propofol (p = 0.88). The mean minimum recorded BIS score was 66.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 62 to 70) for methohexital and 66 (95% CI = 60 to 71) for propofol. VAS results showed similar rates of reported pain, recall, and satisfaction for the two agents.The authors were unable to detect a significant difference in the level of subclinical RD or the level of sedation by BIS between the two agents. The use of either agent seems to be safe in the ED." @default.
• W4247487567 created "2022-05-12" @default.
• W4247487567 creator A5029702979 @default.
• W4247487567 creator A5060919122 @default.
• W4247487567 creator A5075900301 @default.
• W4247487567 creator A5076389841 @default.
• W4247487567 creator A5087582932 @default.
• W4247487567 creator A5089886498 @default.
• W4247487567 date "2003-09-01" @default.
• W4247487567 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W4247487567 title "Randomized Clinical Trial of Propofol versus Methohexital for Procedural Sedation during Fracture and Dislocation Reduction in the Emergency Department" @default.
• W4247487567 cites W190441754 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W1990929229 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W1993701358 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W1995454293 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W1996563991 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2002254780 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2014406350 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2015469088 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2025499314 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2029696555 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2043669389 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2047362382 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2049289092 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2068138921 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2072801512 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2075074900 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2082574732 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2083343637 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2139255073 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W2318822860 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W4242240055 @default.
• W4247487567 cites W4250507448 @default.
• W4247487567 doi "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb00646.x" @default.
• W4247487567 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12957974" @default.
• W4247487567 hasPublicationYear "2003" @default.
• W4247487567 type Work @default.
• W4247487567 citedByCount "47" @default.
• W4247487567 countsByYear W42474875672012 @default.
• W4247487567 countsByYear W42474875672013 @default.
• W4247487567 countsByYear W42474875672014 @default.
• W4247487567 countsByYear W42474875672015 @default.
• W4247487567 countsByYear W42474875672017 @default.
• W4247487567 countsByYear W42474875672018 @default.
• W4247487567 countsByYear W42474875672022 @default.
• W4247487567 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4247487567 hasAuthorship W4247487567A5029702979 @default.
• W4247487567 hasAuthorship W4247487567A5060919122 @default.
• W4247487567 hasAuthorship W4247487567A5075900301 @default.
• W4247487567 hasAuthorship W4247487567A5076389841 @default.
• W4247487567 hasAuthorship W4247487567A5087582932 @default.
• W4247487567 hasAuthorship W4247487567A5089886498 @default.
• W4247487567 hasBestOaLocation W42474875671 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConcept C2776277131 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConcept C2776814716 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConcept C2777260365 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConcept C2780724011 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConcept C42219234 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConcept C84393581 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConceptScore W4247487567C118552586 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConceptScore W4247487567C126322002 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConceptScore W4247487567C141071460 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConceptScore W4247487567C168563851 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConceptScore W4247487567C2776277131 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConceptScore W4247487567C2776814716 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConceptScore W4247487567C2777260365 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConceptScore W4247487567C2780724011 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConceptScore W4247487567C42219234 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConceptScore W4247487567C71924100 @default.
• W4247487567 hasConceptScore W4247487567C84393581 @default.
• W4247487567 hasIssue "9" @default.
• W4247487567 hasLocation W42474875671 @default.
• W4247487567 hasLocation W42474875672 @default.
• W4247487567 hasOpenAccess W4247487567 @default.
• W4247487567 hasPrimaryLocation W42474875671 @default.
• W4247487567 hasRelatedWork W163357817 @default.
• W4247487567 hasRelatedWork W1985198936 @default.
• W4247487567 hasRelatedWork W2001683931 @default.
• W4247487567 hasRelatedWork W2025085996 @default.
• W4247487567 hasRelatedWork W2085712438 @default.
• W4247487567 hasRelatedWork W2116124193 @default.
• W4247487567 hasRelatedWork W2373888550 @default.
• W4247487567 hasRelatedWork W4242342464 @default.
• W4247487567 hasRelatedWork W67055460 @default.
• W4247487567 hasRelatedWork W2184511288 @default.
• W4247487567 hasVolume "10" @default.
• W4247487567 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4247487567 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4247487567 workType "article" @default.