Cargando…
A Quality Improvement Evaluation of a Primary As-Needed Light Sedation Protocol in Mechanically Ventilated Adults
OBJECTIVES: First, to implement successfully a light-sedation protocol, favoring initial as-needed (prioritizing as-needed) boluses over continuous infusion sedation, and second, to evaluate if this protocol was associated with differences in patient-level sedative requirements, clinical outcomes, a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7746207/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33354671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000264 |
_version_ | 1783624749071466496 |
---|---|
author | Groetzinger, Lara M. Rivosecchi, Ryan M. McVerry, Bryan J. Smithburger, Pamela L. Lamberty, Phillip E. Donahoe, Michael P. Barbash, Ian J. |
author_facet | Groetzinger, Lara M. Rivosecchi, Ryan M. McVerry, Bryan J. Smithburger, Pamela L. Lamberty, Phillip E. Donahoe, Michael P. Barbash, Ian J. |
author_sort | Groetzinger, Lara M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: First, to implement successfully a light-sedation protocol, favoring initial as-needed (prioritizing as-needed) boluses over continuous infusion sedation, and second, to evaluate if this protocol was associated with differences in patient-level sedative requirements, clinical outcomes, and unit-level longitudinal changes in pharmacy charges for sedative medications. DESIGN: Retrospective review comparing patients who received the prioritizing as-needed sedation protocol to similar patients eligible for the prioritizing as-needed protocol but treated initially with continuous infusion sedation. SETTING: Thirty-two bed medical ICUs in a large academic medical center. PATIENTS: A total of 254 mechanical ventilated patients with a target Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale goal of 3 or 4 were evaluated over a 2-year period. Of the evaluable patients, 114 received the prioritizing as-needed sedation protocol and 140 received a primary continuous infusion approach. INTERVENTIONS: A multidisciplinary leadership team created and implemented a light-sedation protocol, focusing on avoiding initiation of continuous sedative infusions and prioritizing prioritizing as-needed sedation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: : Overall, 42% of patients in the prioritizing as-needed group never received continuous infusion sedation. Compared with the continuous infusion sedation group, patients treated with the prioritizing as-needed protocol received significantly less opioid, propofol, and benzodiazepine. Patients in the prioritizing as-needed group experienced less delirium, shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, and shorter ICU length of stay. Adverse events were similar between the two groups. At the unit level, protocol implementation was associated with reductions in the use of continuous infusion sedative medications. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation and use of a prioritizing as-needed protocol targeting light sedation appear to be safe and effective. These single-ICU retrospective findings require wider, prospective validation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7746207 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77462072020-12-21 A Quality Improvement Evaluation of a Primary As-Needed Light Sedation Protocol in Mechanically Ventilated Adults Groetzinger, Lara M. Rivosecchi, Ryan M. McVerry, Bryan J. Smithburger, Pamela L. Lamberty, Phillip E. Donahoe, Michael P. Barbash, Ian J. Crit Care Explor Single-Center Quality Improvement Report OBJECTIVES: First, to implement successfully a light-sedation protocol, favoring initial as-needed (prioritizing as-needed) boluses over continuous infusion sedation, and second, to evaluate if this protocol was associated with differences in patient-level sedative requirements, clinical outcomes, and unit-level longitudinal changes in pharmacy charges for sedative medications. DESIGN: Retrospective review comparing patients who received the prioritizing as-needed sedation protocol to similar patients eligible for the prioritizing as-needed protocol but treated initially with continuous infusion sedation. SETTING: Thirty-two bed medical ICUs in a large academic medical center. PATIENTS: A total of 254 mechanical ventilated patients with a target Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale goal of 3 or 4 were evaluated over a 2-year period. Of the evaluable patients, 114 received the prioritizing as-needed sedation protocol and 140 received a primary continuous infusion approach. INTERVENTIONS: A multidisciplinary leadership team created and implemented a light-sedation protocol, focusing on avoiding initiation of continuous sedative infusions and prioritizing prioritizing as-needed sedation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: : Overall, 42% of patients in the prioritizing as-needed group never received continuous infusion sedation. Compared with the continuous infusion sedation group, patients treated with the prioritizing as-needed protocol received significantly less opioid, propofol, and benzodiazepine. Patients in the prioritizing as-needed group experienced less delirium, shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, and shorter ICU length of stay. Adverse events were similar between the two groups. At the unit level, protocol implementation was associated with reductions in the use of continuous infusion sedative medications. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation and use of a prioritizing as-needed protocol targeting light sedation appear to be safe and effective. These single-ICU retrospective findings require wider, prospective validation. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2020-12-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7746207/ /pubmed/33354671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000264 Text en Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Single-Center Quality Improvement Report Groetzinger, Lara M. Rivosecchi, Ryan M. McVerry, Bryan J. Smithburger, Pamela L. Lamberty, Phillip E. Donahoe, Michael P. Barbash, Ian J. A Quality Improvement Evaluation of a Primary As-Needed Light Sedation Protocol in Mechanically Ventilated Adults |
title | A Quality Improvement Evaluation of a Primary As-Needed Light Sedation Protocol in Mechanically Ventilated Adults |
title_full | A Quality Improvement Evaluation of a Primary As-Needed Light Sedation Protocol in Mechanically Ventilated Adults |
title_fullStr | A Quality Improvement Evaluation of a Primary As-Needed Light Sedation Protocol in Mechanically Ventilated Adults |
title_full_unstemmed | A Quality Improvement Evaluation of a Primary As-Needed Light Sedation Protocol in Mechanically Ventilated Adults |
title_short | A Quality Improvement Evaluation of a Primary As-Needed Light Sedation Protocol in Mechanically Ventilated Adults |
title_sort | quality improvement evaluation of a primary as-needed light sedation protocol in mechanically ventilated adults |
topic | Single-Center Quality Improvement Report |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7746207/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33354671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CCE.0000000000000264 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT groetzingerlaram aqualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT rivosecchiryanm aqualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT mcverrybryanj aqualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT smithburgerpamelal aqualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT lambertyphillipe aqualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT donahoemichaelp aqualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT barbashianj aqualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT groetzingerlaram qualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT rivosecchiryanm qualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT mcverrybryanj qualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT smithburgerpamelal qualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT lambertyphillipe qualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT donahoemichaelp qualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults AT barbashianj qualityimprovementevaluationofaprimaryasneededlightsedationprotocolinmechanicallyventilatedadults |