BACKGROUND: Antipsychotic medications are effective treatments for schizophrenia (SZ) and bipolar I disorder (BD-I), but when presented with different treatment options, there are tradeoffs that individuals make between clinical improvement and adverse effects. As new options become available, understanding the attributes of antipsychotic medications that are valued and the tradeoffs that individuals consider when choosing among them is important.
METHODS: A discrete-choice experiment (DCE) was administered online to elicit preferences across 5 attributes of oral antipsychotics: treatment efficacy (i.e., improvement in symptom severity), weight gain over 6 months, sexual dysfunction, sedation, and akathisia. Eligible respondents were aged 18-64 years with a self-reported clinician diagnosis of SZ or BD-I.
RESULTS: In total, 144 respondents with SZ and 152 with BD-I completed the DCE. Of those with SZ, 50% identified themselves as female and 69.4% as White, with a mean (SD) age of 41.0 (10.1) years. Of those with BD-I, most identified themselves as female (69.7%) and as White (77.6%), with a mean (SD) age of 40.0 (10.7) years. In both cohorts, respondents preferred oral antipsychotics with better efficacy, less weight gain, no sexual dysfunction or akathisia, and lower risk of sedation. Treatment efficacy was the most important attribute, with a conditional relative importance (CRI) of 31.4% for respondents with SZ and 31.0% for those with BD-I. Weight gain (CRI = 21.3% and 23.1%, respectively) and sexual dysfunction (CRI = 23.4% and 19.2%, respectively) were adverse effects in this study that respondents most wanted to avoid. Respondents with SZ were willing to accept 9.8 lb of weight gain or > 25% risk of sedation for symptom improvement; those with BD-I were willing to accept 8.5 lb of weight gain or a > 25% risk of sedation.
CONCLUSIONS: In this DCE, treatment efficacy was the most important attribute of oral antipsychotic medications among respondents with SZ and BD-I. Weight gain and sexual dysfunction were the adverse effects respondents most wanted to avoid; however, both cohorts were willing to accept some weight gain or sedation to obtain better efficacy. These results highlight features that patients value in antipsychotic medications and how they balance benefits and risks when choosing among treatments.

BACKGROUND: Airway management including endotracheal intubation (ETI) is a key skill for emergency clinicians. Therefore, it is important for emergency clinicians to be aware of the current evidence regarding the identification and management of patients requiring ETI.
OBJECTIVE: This paper evaluates key evidence-based updates concerning ETI for the emergency clinician.
CONCLUSIONS: ETI is commonly performed in the emergency department (ED) setting but has many nuanced components. There are several tools that have been used to predict a difficult airway which incorporate anatomic and physiologic features. While helpful, these tools should not be used in isolation. Preoxygenation and apneic oxygenation are recommended to reduce the risk of desaturation and patient decompensation, particularly with noninvasive ventilation in critically ill patients. Induction and neuromuscular blocking medications should be tailored to the clinical scenario. Video laryngoscopy is superior to direct laryngoscopy among novice users, while both techniques are reasonable among more experienced clinicians. Recent literature suggests using a bougie during the first attempt. Point-of-care ultrasound is helpful for confirming correct placement and depth of the endotracheal tube.
CONCLUSIONS: An understanding of literature updates can improve the ED care of patients requiring emergent intubation.

This manuscript explores the potential use of Remimazolam in the intensive care unit (ICU) and critical care units, considering its pharmacological characteristics, clinical applications, advantages, and comparative effectiveness over current sedatives and anesthetics. We reviewed existing PubMed and Google Scholar literature to find relevant studies on Remimazolam in ICU. We created search criteria using a combination of free text words, including Remimazolam, critical care, intensive care, sedation, anesthesia, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics. Relevant articles published in the English language were analyzed and incorporated. Remimazolam is an ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine derivative promising for sedation and anesthesia. It is a safer option for hemodynamically unstable, elderly, or liver or kidney issues. It also has comparable deep sedation properties to propofol in the ICU. Furthermore, it reduces post-procedural delirium and patient comfort and reduces the need for additional sedatives in pediatric patients. In conclusion, Remimazolam is an excellent alternative to current sedatives and anesthetics in the ICU. Its cost is comparable to that of current medications. Further research on its long-term safety in the ICU and its broader application and incorporation into routine use is necessary.

Background Painful procedures in the pediatric emergency department often require the use of sedation and analgesia to ensure adequate pain control, a right of children and adolescents. This study aims to describe the procedural sedation and analgesia with intravenous medications performed in a pediatric emergency department. Methods This is a retrospective descriptive study of intravenous sedoanalgesia used in a pediatric emergency department of a level II district hospital in the Lisbon metropolitan area from October 2018 to December 2023. The type of intervention, drugs used, and adverse events were analyzed. Results A total of 615 patients were included in the study; 65.7% (n=404) were male with a median age of 6 years. The most frequently performed procedures were wound suturing (50.9%, n=313) and fracture reduction (36.3%, n=223). The drugs used for sedation and analgesia were ketamine (99.2%, n=610), midazolam (95.8%, n=589), propofol (1.6%, n=10), and morphine (0.5%, n=3). The majority of patients received midazolam and ketamine in association (93.8%, n=577). A total of 50 adverse events (8.1%) were recorded in 42 patients. The most frequent side effects were transient oxygen desaturation (2%, n=12), vomiting (1.5%, n=9), apnea/bradypnea (1%, n=6), and hallucinations (0.8%, n=5). The occurrence of adverse events was not dose-dependent (p >0.05). Respiratory complications resolved without requiring invasive interventions. Children were sedated by a pediatric intensivist in 68.1% (n=419), by a general pediatrician in 26.7% (n=164), and by a pediatric resident in 2% (n=12). Conclusions The results of this study demonstrate that intravenous sedoanalgesia, particularly the combination of ketamine and midazolam, is a safe method for sedation in pediatric patients, with a low rate of adverse events.

BACKGROUND: Off-label intranasal administration of injectable dexmedetomidine has been widely applied in the pediatric sedation setting. However, the development of an improved drug delivery system that is easy to use is needed. We developed a novel dexmedetomidine nasal spray that can be administered directly without dilution or configuration for pediatric pre-anesthetic sedation. This nasal spray has a fixed dose and is stable during storage. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first licensed nasal spray preparation of dexmedetomidine worldwide.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the pre-anesthetic sedation efficacy and safety of the novel dexmedetomidine nasal spray in children.
METHODS: The study was conducted at 11 sites in China between 24 November 2021 and 20 May 2022 and was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05111431, first registration date: 20/10/2021). Subjects (n = 159) between 2 and 6 years old who were to undergo elective surgery were randomized to the dexmedetomidine group (n = 107) or the placebo group (n = 52) in a 2:1 ratio. The dosage was 30 µg or 50 µg based on the stratified body weight. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of subjects who achieved the desired child-parent separation and Ramsay scale ≥ 3 within 45 min of administration. Safety was monitored via the assessments of adverse events, blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate and blood oxygen saturation.
RESULTS: The proportion of subjects achieving desired parental separation and Ramsay scale ≥ 3 within 45 min was significantly higher in the dexmedetomidine group (94.4%) vs the placebo group (32.0%) (P < 0.0001). As compared with placebo, dexmedetomidine treatment led to more subjects achieving Ramsay scale ≥ 3 or UMSS ≥ 2, and shorter time to reach desired parental separation, Ramsay scale ≥ 3 and UMSS ≥ 2 (all P < 0.0001). Adverse events were reported in 90.7% and 84.0% of subjects in the dexmedetomidine and placebo groups, respectively, and all the events were mild or moderate in severity.
CONCLUSIONS: This novel dexmedetomidine nasal spray presented effective pre-anesthetic sedation in children with a tolerable safety profile.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate sedation and IV xylazine requirements to achieve 45% of baseline head height above ground measurements following oral (PO) administration of 2 trazodone dosages.
METHODS: 8 healthy, adult mares of various weights and breeds belonging to a university teaching herd were utilized in a blinded, crossover study design. Horses were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 PO treatments: control (no trazodone), trazodone at 3 mg/kg (low dose [LD]), or trazodone at 6 mg/kg (high dose [HD]). Before treatment, cardiac auscultation, EquiSed sedation score, and head height above ground (HHAG; cm) measurements were performed (baseline) followed by feeding of the treatment mixture. After 120 minutes, sedation score and HHAG were recorded. Xylazine was administered IV (0.25 mg/kg bolus followed by 0.1 mg/kg/min) until HHAG reached 45% of baseline or a total dose of 1 mg/kg was reached. Individual data for xylazine dosage, sedation scores, and HHAG were analyzed using mixed linear models with repeated measures.
RESULTS: Sedation scores were significantly improved (LD, P = .045; HD, P = .01) and HHAG was lowered (LD, P = .045; HD, P = .09) by trazodone administration. Xylazine dose requirements were increased by LD trazodone administration (increase of 0.26 ± 0.26 mg/kg; P = .03) and unchanged by HD (increase of 0.13 ± 0.25 mg/kg; P = .38).
CONCLUSIONS: Oral trazodone administration increases quantifiable sedation in horses. Xylazine requirements are significantly increased by LD trazodone administration.
CONCLUSIONS: Oral administration of LD trazodone may increase xylazine requirements. Further clinical studies are required to fully assess the clinical relevance of this finding on other parameters such as cardiovascular physiology.

Sedation and analgesia during gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy increase procedural quality, contributing at the same time to greater patient satisfaction and willingness to undergo the procedure. Although sedation use has been optimized by the advent of efficacious and safe medications, data regarding the minimal criteria for discharge after outpatient endoscopy remain scant. Moreover, the time of discharge after endoscopy can be highly variable, depending not only on the type of procedure and anesthesia administered, but also on postprocedural complications and the patient\'s comorbidities. To make things even more conflicting, there is neither consensus among various endoscopic societies, concerning the most appropriate discharge strategy, nor a universally established tool that could be incorporated into everyday clinical practice, allowing patients\' safe discharge as well as ability to drive. In this context, we conducted a systematic review, aiming to summarize the evidence regarding the available discharge scoring systems after outpatient GI endoscopy with sedation and analgesia administration.

UNASSIGNED: Establishing routine intravenous (IV) access prior to interventional pain procedures performed without sedation is controversial. Anecdotally, practices very in terms of their use of routine IV access.
UNASSIGNED: To determine the frequency with which routine IV access is obtained for various common interventional pain procedures among interventional pain providers.
UNASSIGNED: An anonymous survey was distributed to physician members of the Spine Intervention Society (SIS) on 08/13/2020, and remained open until 10/13/2020. Respondents provided information regarding demographics and current practice patterns.
UNASSIGNED: 141 SIS members completed the survey. A bimodal distribution was noted for most procedures, with most providers obtaining routine IV access either 0% of the time or 81-100% of the time. Routine IV access was used more frequently when performing cervical spine procedures, splanchnic or hypogastric plexus blocks, lumbar sympathetic blocks, and spinal cord stimulator trials. Excluding cases where IV\'s were used for sedation, the only procedures which providers obtained routine IV access more often than not were spinal cord stimulator trials, splanchnic/celiac plexus blocks, and hypogastric plexus blocks. Over half (52.5%) of respondents reported using an IV for an emergent situation in their career. While most providers would not modify their IV usage based on practice location, those that would were significantly more likely to decrease IV use if working in clinic-based procedures suites (n ​= ​25) compared to hospital-based surgical centers (n ​= ​2) or ambulatory surgical centers (n ​= ​9, p ​< ​0.001).
UNASSIGNED: There remains wide variation among practitioners in establishing routine intravenous access prior to interventional procedures. Most providers surveyed do not routinely establish IV access for the majority of interventional pain procedures. Routine IV access is more commonly obtained for cervical spine procedures than other spinal regions. Overall, complications precipitating the need for IV use are rare in interventional spine but likely to happen over the course of a career.

BACKGROUND: Sedation at the end of life is used to relieve distressing symptoms including agitation and delirium. Standard care may include infused benzodiazepines or antipsychotics. These agents often result in deep sedation with loss of interaction with loved ones, which may be distressing.
OBJECTIVE: The DREAMS (Dexmedetomidine for the Reduction of End-of-life Agitation and for optiMised Sedation) trial aimed to compare the sedative and antidelirium effects of the alpha-2 agonist dexmedetomidine, a novel palliative care sedative, compared with midazolam, a benzodiazepine when administered by subcutaneous infusion at the end of life, with doses of both agents targeting lighter, or potentially interactive sedation.
METHODS: Participants were recruited from adult inpatients admitted for end-of-life care under a palliative care team in regional New South Wales, Australia. Inclusion criteria included patients older than 18 years, with a preference for lighter sedation at the end of life. Exclusion criteria included severe cardiac dysfunction (contraindication to dexmedetomidine). Participants consented and were placed on a treatment-pending list. Upon experiencing terminal deterioration, patients were randomized to either arm 1 (dexmedetomidine) or arm 2 (midazolam) as their treatment arm. These treatments were administered by continuous subcutaneous infusion. The level of consciousness and agitation of the patients were measured by the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale-Palliative version and the Memorial Delirium Assessment Score. Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale-Palliative version assessments were performed by both nursing and medical staff, while Memorial Delirium Assessment Score assessments were carried out by medical staff only. Families and patients were asked to complete, as able, a patient comfort assessment form, to gauge perceptions of distress. Data were collected and matched with the breakthrough medication doses administered, along with qualitative comments in the medical record. In addition, the study tracked symptoms and patient functional status that were recorded as part of the Palliative Care Outcomes Collaborative, a national tracking project for monitoring symptom outcomes in palliative care.
RESULTS: The DREAMS trial was funded in May 2020, approved by the ethics committee in November 2020, and started recruiting participants in May 2021. Data collection commenced in May 2021 and is anticipated to continue until December 2024. Publication of results is anticipated from 2024 to 2026.
CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base for sedative dosing in palliative care for distress and agitation is not robust, with standard care based primarily on clinical experience and not robust scientific evidence. This study is important because it will compare a standard and a novel sedative used in end-of-life treatment. By assessing the potential efficacy and benefits of both, it seeks to optimize the quality of dying by providing targeted sedation that can improve the communication between dying patients and their loved ones.
BACKGROUND: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Register ACTRN12621000052831; https://uat.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=380889.
UNASSIGNED: DERR1-10.2196/55129.

Sedation management in critically ill patients is a critical component of intensive care, aiming to balance the need for comfort and immobilization with preserving vital physiological functions. Ketamine, known for its dissociative anesthetic properties, has emerged as a promising alternative to traditional sedatives due to its unique pharmacological profile. This review explores the pharmacodynamics, clinical applications, benefits, challenges, and current evidence surrounding ketamine as a sedative agent in intensive care settings. Key advantages of ketamine include its ability to maintain respiratory drive and hemodynamic stability, making it particularly suitable for patients requiring continuous monitoring and intervention. The review discusses its role in sedation protocols, compares its effectiveness with other sedatives, and highlights potential areas for further research and optimization. By elucidating the complexities and advancements in ketamine sedation, this review aims to inform clinical practice and contribute to improved outcomes for critically ill patients.