Procedural Sedation in a UAE Emergency Department: Encouraging Informed Decision-Making Through a Patient Information...

Introduction Procedural sedation is a common procedure conducted in emergency departments (ED) across the world, which requires patients to receive anesthesia/sedation medication in a controlled environment in order to alleviate pain, anxiety, and suffering, thereby allowing multiple procedures to be completed in a safe and timely manner. We deploy this technique for joint reductions, burns dressings, wound repairs, etc. in our ED. As a large tertiary referral hospital ED, we aimed to benchmark our practice for this high-acuity procedure against international standards. The main objective of our audit was to benchmark our current practice of procedural sedation against international standards from the Royal College of Emergency Medicine (RCEM), United Kingdom, and American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) guidelines. As a secondary objective, we aimed to design and implement a multi-lingual procedural sedation leaflet for our patients and their carers. Methods A retrospective electronic healthcare records review was conducted from January 2019 to August 2022 following which a convenience sample of 100 patients was selected. Records audited were obtained from the Hospital Quality and Pharmacy departments. We selected patients from the data provided by selecting sedation medication used (ketamine, midazolam, propofol) and frequency documented as 'pre-procedure' (Pre-Proc). We included patients of all age groups who received procedural sedation in the emergency department and excluded inpatient encounters. After reviewing RCEM and ACEP guidance, we studied 14 criteria and standards. A team comprising physicians and hospital interpreters was set up to draft a procedural sedation leaflet. After hospital marketing team approval, these were published in Arabic, English, Urdu, Hindi, Bengali, and Malayalam. Results Compliance percentages of the 14 criteria were calculated. A "traffic light" color scheme was used to inform the reader of areas of good practice and areas for improvement. Percentages of 90-100% (green) were considered compliant, 80-89% (amber) were partially compliant, and 79% or less (red) were non-compliant. Of the 14 criteria, 10 were fully compliant. One criterion was partially compliant and three criteria were non-compliant. Conclusion Overall, we performed well in in this audit with 100% compliance rates in many areas. We identified that we had no written discharge information leaflet for our patients and carers. We drafted a multi-lingual procedural sedation leaflet and stocked this in the department. Through face-to-face education, we re-trained physicians on the importance of documentation when adhering to safe practices around procedural sedation.