Register for email alerts and news feeds:
This journal | BMJ Group
rss
Emergency Medicine Journal 2009;26:576-579; doi:10.1136/emj.2008.067801
© 2009 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and the College of Emergency Medicine.

ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Rapid sequence induction in the emergency department: induction drug and outcome of patients admitted to the intensive care unit

C R W Baird, A W Hay, D W McKeown, D C Ray

Departments of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh, UK

Correspondence to:
Dr D C Ray, Departments of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Royal Infirmary, Little France Crescent, Edinburgh EH16 4SA, UK; david.ray{at}luht.scot.nhs.uk

Objectives: Etomidate is used widely for rapid sequence induction (RSI) of anaesthesia in the emergency department (ED) as a result of its relative cardiovascular stability. There is concern over possible adrenal suppression and also that outcomes could be worse than in patients given other induction drugs. This possible association has not been studied in ED patients undergoing RSI.

Methods: 525 consecutive patients who underwent RSI in the ED and were subsequently admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) were reviewed. The following information was retrieved from the records: induction drug use; incidence of hypotension and vasopressor administration at induction; acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II severity of illness and predicted mortality; and ICU and hospital outcome. The choice of induction drug was not controlled but was at the discretion of the attending clinicians.

Results: The numbers of patients given an induction drug were 184 etomidate, 306 thiopental and 35 propofol. Patients given etomidate were older and sicker than those given thiopental or propofol. Mortality appeared greater with etomidate but there was no difference when outcome was related to pre-existing risk. Age, APACHE II score and presenting diagnosis were independent predictors of hospital mortality, but etomidate use was not.

Conclusion: Induction drug was not related to patient outcome in this cohort of patients. The risks of developing hypotension and receiving a vasopressor at induction were greatest with propofol. Emergency physicians should choose an induction drug based on individual patient circumstances, rather than being solely concerned about adrenal suppression.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

This Article

Services
Google Scholar
PubMed
Topic Collections
Bookmark with

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

 

The journal is co-owned by and the official journal of College of Emergency Medicine

Official journal of British Association for Immediate Care: BASICS, Faculty of Pre-Hospital Care, Irish Society for Immediate Care and Swedish Society for Emergency Medicine: SweSEM

Emergency Medicine Jobs

Emergency Medicine Jobs