Cargando…

Daily sedative interruption versus intermittent sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND: Daily sedative interruption and intermittent sedation are effective in abbreviating the time on mechanical ventilation. Whether one is superior to the other has not yet been determined. Our aim was to compare daily interruption and intermittent sedation during the mechanical ventilation...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nassar Junior, Antonio Paulo, Park, Marcelo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4026117/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24900938
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2110-5820-4-14
_version_ 1782316807479099392
author Nassar Junior, Antonio Paulo
Park, Marcelo
author_facet Nassar Junior, Antonio Paulo
Park, Marcelo
author_sort Nassar Junior, Antonio Paulo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Daily sedative interruption and intermittent sedation are effective in abbreviating the time on mechanical ventilation. Whether one is superior to the other has not yet been determined. Our aim was to compare daily interruption and intermittent sedation during the mechanical ventilation period in a low nurse staffing ICU. METHODS: Adult patients expected to need mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours were randomly assigned, in a single center, either to daily interruption of continuous sedative and opioid infusion or to intermittent sedation. In both cases, our goal was to maintain a Sedation Agitation Scale (SAS) level of 3 or 4; that is patients should be calm, easily arousable or awakened with verbal stimuli or gentle shaking. Primary outcome was ventilator-free days in 28 days. Secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital mortality, incidence of delirium, nurse workload, self-extubation and psychological distress six months after ICU discharge. RESULTS: A total of 60 patients were included. There were no differences in the ventilator-free days in 28 days between daily interruption and intermittent sedation (median: 24 versus 25 days, P = 0.160). There were also no differences in ICU mortality (40 versus 23.3%, P = 0.165), hospital mortality (43.3 versus 30%, P = 0.284), incidence of delirium (30 versus 40%, P = 0.472), self-extubation (3.3 versus 6.7%, P = 0.514), and psychological stress six months after ICU discharge. Also, the nurse workload was not different between groups, but it was reduced on day 5 compared to day 1 in both groups (Nurse Activity Score (NAS) in the intermittent sedation group was 54 on day 1 versus 39 on day 5, P < 0.001; NAS in daily interruption group was 53 on day 1 versus 38 on day 5, P < 0.001). Fentanyl and midazolam total dosages per patient were higher in the daily interruption group. The tidal volume was higher in the intermittent sedation group during the first five days of ICU stay. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the number of ventilator-free days in 28 days between both groups. Intermittent sedation was associated with lower sedative and opioid doses. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00824239.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4026117
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Springer
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40261172014-06-04 Daily sedative interruption versus intermittent sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized trial Nassar Junior, Antonio Paulo Park, Marcelo Ann Intensive Care Research BACKGROUND: Daily sedative interruption and intermittent sedation are effective in abbreviating the time on mechanical ventilation. Whether one is superior to the other has not yet been determined. Our aim was to compare daily interruption and intermittent sedation during the mechanical ventilation period in a low nurse staffing ICU. METHODS: Adult patients expected to need mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours were randomly assigned, in a single center, either to daily interruption of continuous sedative and opioid infusion or to intermittent sedation. In both cases, our goal was to maintain a Sedation Agitation Scale (SAS) level of 3 or 4; that is patients should be calm, easily arousable or awakened with verbal stimuli or gentle shaking. Primary outcome was ventilator-free days in 28 days. Secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital mortality, incidence of delirium, nurse workload, self-extubation and psychological distress six months after ICU discharge. RESULTS: A total of 60 patients were included. There were no differences in the ventilator-free days in 28 days between daily interruption and intermittent sedation (median: 24 versus 25 days, P = 0.160). There were also no differences in ICU mortality (40 versus 23.3%, P = 0.165), hospital mortality (43.3 versus 30%, P = 0.284), incidence of delirium (30 versus 40%, P = 0.472), self-extubation (3.3 versus 6.7%, P = 0.514), and psychological stress six months after ICU discharge. Also, the nurse workload was not different between groups, but it was reduced on day 5 compared to day 1 in both groups (Nurse Activity Score (NAS) in the intermittent sedation group was 54 on day 1 versus 39 on day 5, P < 0.001; NAS in daily interruption group was 53 on day 1 versus 38 on day 5, P < 0.001). Fentanyl and midazolam total dosages per patient were higher in the daily interruption group. The tidal volume was higher in the intermittent sedation group during the first five days of ICU stay. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in the number of ventilator-free days in 28 days between both groups. Intermittent sedation was associated with lower sedative and opioid doses. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00824239. Springer 2014-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4026117/ /pubmed/24900938 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2110-5820-4-14 Text en Copyright © 2014 Nassar Junior and Park; licensee Springer. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.
spellingShingle Research
Nassar Junior, Antonio Paulo
Park, Marcelo
Daily sedative interruption versus intermittent sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized trial
title Daily sedative interruption versus intermittent sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized trial
title_full Daily sedative interruption versus intermittent sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized trial
title_fullStr Daily sedative interruption versus intermittent sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized trial
title_full_unstemmed Daily sedative interruption versus intermittent sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized trial
title_short Daily sedative interruption versus intermittent sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized trial
title_sort daily sedative interruption versus intermittent sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4026117/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24900938
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2110-5820-4-14
work_keys_str_mv AT nassarjuniorantoniopaulo dailysedativeinterruptionversusintermittentsedationinmechanicallyventilatedcriticallyillpatientsarandomizedtrial
AT parkmarcelo dailysedativeinterruptionversusintermittentsedationinmechanicallyventilatedcriticallyillpatientsarandomizedtrial