Key result
Propofol sedation provided by anesthesia specialists during endoscopy improves patient satisfaction and exam quality but carries a significant economic burden.
Why the study?
Is an anesthesiologist necessary for administering propofol sedation during endoscopy considering patient satisfaction, safety, and economic burden?
Is an anesthesiologist necessary for administering propofol sedation during endoscopy considering patient satisfaction, safety, and economic burden?
This review discusses the trade-offs between the clinical benefits of propofol sedation in endoscopy and the economic and safety implications of who administers it.
The use of propofol for sedation during endoscopy has been increasing, particularly given its association with superior patient satisfaction. Propofol sedation may also allow for higher quality endoscopy exams, increased efficiency of endoscopy suites and most particularly, permit better patient compliance with colonoscopy for colorectal cancer screening. However, propofol is typically provided by anesthesia specialists via monitored anesthesia care, and is associated with significant economic burden. Given the increasing use of monitored anesthesia care, which adds significant costs to endoscopy, payers are likely to react with changes in payer policies. One alternative to monitored anesthesia care is non-anesthesiologist administered propofol, which due to safety concerns and a lack of reimbursement has not been widely adopted in the US.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Birk et al. (2015) conducted a review in Endoscopy sedation. Propofol sedation via monitored anesthesia care vs. Non-anesthesiologist administered propofol was evaluated. Propofol sedation provided by anesthesia specialists during endoscopy improves patient satisfaction and exam quality but carries a significant economic burden.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: