Period prevalence of ketamine-propofol admixture “Ketofol” in the operating room among anesthesia providers at an academic medical center

Alliene N. Olson, Willow R. Rao, Mary E. Marienau, Nathan Smischney

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The primary aim of this study was to determine the period prevalence of the single-syringe ketamine-propofol admixture used for sedation and induction among anesthesia providers during a 5-year period before and after educational sessions addressing barriers to its use. Secondary aims were to determine barriers to its use and address the most prevalent concerns through educational sessions. Material/Methods: Surveys were administered to certified and student registered nurse anesthetists, anesthesia residents, and anesthesiologists at Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN before and after educational sessions addressing common barriers. Identified barriers were addressed by oral and/or electronic presentations with identical content. Results: Pre-education period prevalence for sedation was 110 (43%) and 64 (25%) for induction. Identified barriers were uncertainty of benefit in 62 respondents (23%), mixed controlled substance disposal in 48 (18%), regulatory/ institutional policies in 20 (7%), and compatibility in 9 (3%). Post-education period prevalence for sedation was 102 (44%), and induction 63 (27%). No concerns were noted in 72% of the post-education group verses 42% in the pre-education group (p<0.01). No concerns were reported in 51% of the electronic only education group verses 64% in the oral education group (p<0.01). Conclusions: The period prevalence of “ketofol” was greater for sedation than induction. The period prevalence following education showed a slight increase in both sedation and induction use. There was a significant reduction in barriers following education, with oral presentations being more effective than electronic only. Period prevalence was increasing following education; however, allowing more time may have shown a significant practice change.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1737-1744
Number of pages8
JournalMedical Science Monitor
Volume21
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 16 2015

Fingerprint

Ketamine
Propofol
Operating Rooms
Anesthesia
Education
Controlled Substances
Nurse Anesthetists
Organizational Policy
Syringes
Uncertainty
Nurses
Students

Keywords

  • Anesthesia
  • Combination
  • Drug therapy
  • Ketamine
  • Operating rooms
  • Prevalence
  • Propofol

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Period prevalence of ketamine-propofol admixture “Ketofol” in the operating room among anesthesia providers at an academic medical center. / Olson, Alliene N.; Rao, Willow R.; Marienau, Mary E.; Smischney, Nathan.

In: Medical Science Monitor, Vol. 21, 16.06.2015, p. 1737-1744.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{50ae7e0ea3aa4bf0b88f29f8fec395da,
title = "Period prevalence of ketamine-propofol admixture “Ketofol” in the operating room among anesthesia providers at an academic medical center",
abstract = "Background: The primary aim of this study was to determine the period prevalence of the single-syringe ketamine-propofol admixture used for sedation and induction among anesthesia providers during a 5-year period before and after educational sessions addressing barriers to its use. Secondary aims were to determine barriers to its use and address the most prevalent concerns through educational sessions. Material/Methods: Surveys were administered to certified and student registered nurse anesthetists, anesthesia residents, and anesthesiologists at Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN before and after educational sessions addressing common barriers. Identified barriers were addressed by oral and/or electronic presentations with identical content. Results: Pre-education period prevalence for sedation was 110 (43{\%}) and 64 (25{\%}) for induction. Identified barriers were uncertainty of benefit in 62 respondents (23{\%}), mixed controlled substance disposal in 48 (18{\%}), regulatory/ institutional policies in 20 (7{\%}), and compatibility in 9 (3{\%}). Post-education period prevalence for sedation was 102 (44{\%}), and induction 63 (27{\%}). No concerns were noted in 72{\%} of the post-education group verses 42{\%} in the pre-education group (p<0.01). No concerns were reported in 51{\%} of the electronic only education group verses 64{\%} in the oral education group (p<0.01). Conclusions: The period prevalence of “ketofol” was greater for sedation than induction. The period prevalence following education showed a slight increase in both sedation and induction use. There was a significant reduction in barriers following education, with oral presentations being more effective than electronic only. Period prevalence was increasing following education; however, allowing more time may have shown a significant practice change.",
keywords = "Anesthesia, Combination, Drug therapy, Ketamine, Operating rooms, Prevalence, Propofol",
author = "Olson, {Alliene N.} and Rao, {Willow R.} and Marienau, {Mary E.} and Nathan Smischney",
year = "2015",
month = "6",
day = "16",
doi = "10.12659/MSM.893944",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "1737--1744",
journal = "Medical Science Monitor",
issn = "1234-1010",
publisher = "International Scientific Literature Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Period prevalence of ketamine-propofol admixture “Ketofol” in the operating room among anesthesia providers at an academic medical center

AU - Olson, Alliene N.

AU - Rao, Willow R.

AU - Marienau, Mary E.

AU - Smischney, Nathan

PY - 2015/6/16

Y1 - 2015/6/16

N2 - Background: The primary aim of this study was to determine the period prevalence of the single-syringe ketamine-propofol admixture used for sedation and induction among anesthesia providers during a 5-year period before and after educational sessions addressing barriers to its use. Secondary aims were to determine barriers to its use and address the most prevalent concerns through educational sessions. Material/Methods: Surveys were administered to certified and student registered nurse anesthetists, anesthesia residents, and anesthesiologists at Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN before and after educational sessions addressing common barriers. Identified barriers were addressed by oral and/or electronic presentations with identical content. Results: Pre-education period prevalence for sedation was 110 (43%) and 64 (25%) for induction. Identified barriers were uncertainty of benefit in 62 respondents (23%), mixed controlled substance disposal in 48 (18%), regulatory/ institutional policies in 20 (7%), and compatibility in 9 (3%). Post-education period prevalence for sedation was 102 (44%), and induction 63 (27%). No concerns were noted in 72% of the post-education group verses 42% in the pre-education group (p<0.01). No concerns were reported in 51% of the electronic only education group verses 64% in the oral education group (p<0.01). Conclusions: The period prevalence of “ketofol” was greater for sedation than induction. The period prevalence following education showed a slight increase in both sedation and induction use. There was a significant reduction in barriers following education, with oral presentations being more effective than electronic only. Period prevalence was increasing following education; however, allowing more time may have shown a significant practice change.

AB - Background: The primary aim of this study was to determine the period prevalence of the single-syringe ketamine-propofol admixture used for sedation and induction among anesthesia providers during a 5-year period before and after educational sessions addressing barriers to its use. Secondary aims were to determine barriers to its use and address the most prevalent concerns through educational sessions. Material/Methods: Surveys were administered to certified and student registered nurse anesthetists, anesthesia residents, and anesthesiologists at Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN before and after educational sessions addressing common barriers. Identified barriers were addressed by oral and/or electronic presentations with identical content. Results: Pre-education period prevalence for sedation was 110 (43%) and 64 (25%) for induction. Identified barriers were uncertainty of benefit in 62 respondents (23%), mixed controlled substance disposal in 48 (18%), regulatory/ institutional policies in 20 (7%), and compatibility in 9 (3%). Post-education period prevalence for sedation was 102 (44%), and induction 63 (27%). No concerns were noted in 72% of the post-education group verses 42% in the pre-education group (p<0.01). No concerns were reported in 51% of the electronic only education group verses 64% in the oral education group (p<0.01). Conclusions: The period prevalence of “ketofol” was greater for sedation than induction. The period prevalence following education showed a slight increase in both sedation and induction use. There was a significant reduction in barriers following education, with oral presentations being more effective than electronic only. Period prevalence was increasing following education; however, allowing more time may have shown a significant practice change.

KW - Anesthesia

KW - Combination

KW - Drug therapy

KW - Ketamine

KW - Operating rooms

KW - Prevalence

KW - Propofol

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84934900224&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84934900224&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.12659/MSM.893944

DO - 10.12659/MSM.893944

M3 - Article

C2 - 26077108

AN - SCOPUS:84934900224

VL - 21

SP - 1737

EP - 1744

JO - Medical Science Monitor

JF - Medical Science Monitor

SN - 1234-1010

ER -