A multicentre observational study of the use of antiseizure medication in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage in the PROMOTE-SAH study.

Our objective was to describe antiseizure medication (ASM) prescription patterns, and associations between ASM use and death and disability outcomes in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH) admitted to ICU. This was a multi-centre prospective observational study. The study took place in eleven ICUs across Australia and New Zealand. Data was collected from 1 April 2017 to 1 October 2018. Three hundred and fifty-seven adult patients with aSAH were enrolled. The primary outcome was to describe patterns of ASM prescription. The secondary outcome of interest was death or disability (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≥ 4) at six months, and its association with ASM therapy, and relevant clinical subgroups. Forty percent of patients received an ASM and the most commonly used agent was levetiracetam. The median length of ASM administration was eight days (IQR 4.5-12.5). A number of patients with prehospital seizures did not receive ASM therapy (14/55, 2725%). There was a tendency towards ASM prescription with both higher radiological and clinical grade aSAH. There was no significant association between death or disability at six month (mRS ≥ 4) and ASM vs No ASM prescription. Testing for an interaction effect between ASM administration and WFNS grade suggested inferior outcomes with ASM use in lower aSAH grades (p = 0.04). In conclusion, the prescription of ASM for aSAH in Australia is variable across and within sites, with the majority of patients not receiving ASM chemoprophylaxis. We demonstrated no significant association between death or disability at six months and the use of ASM. There may be an association with poorer outcomes in patients with lower grade aSAH. This finding requires further exploration.

The Efficacy of Earplugs as a Sleep Hygiene Strategy for Reducing Delirium in the ICU: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: A systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of earplugs as an ICU strategy for reducing delirium. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials were searched using the terms "intensive care," "critical care," "earplugs," "sleep," "sleep disorders," and "delirium." STUDY SELECTION: Intervention studies (randomized or nonrandomized) assessing the efficacy of earplugs as a sleep hygiene strategy in patients admitted to a critical care environment were included. Studies were excluded if they included only healthy volunteers, did not report any outcomes of interest, did not contain an intervention group of interest, were crossover studies, or were only published in abstract form. DATA EXTRACTION: Nine studies published between 2009 and 2015, including 1,455 participants, fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. Studies included earplugs as an isolated intervention (n = 3), or as part of a bundle with eye shades (n = 2), or earplugs, eye shades, and additional sleep noise abatement strategies (n = 4). The risk of bias was high for all studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: Five studies comprising 832 participants reported incident delirium. Earplug placement was associated with a relative risk of delirium of 0.59 (95% CI, 0.44-0.78) and no significant heterogeneity between the studies (I, 39%; p = 0.16). Hospital mortality was reported in four studies (n = 481) and was associated with a relative risk of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.54-1.11; I, 0%; p < 0.001). Compliance with the placement of earplugs was reported in six studies (n = 681). The mean per-patient noncompliance was 13.1% (95% CI, 7.8-25.4) of those assigned to receive earplugs. CONCLUSIONS: Placement of earplugs in patients admitted to the ICU, either in isolation or as part of a bundle of sleep hygiene improvement, is associated with a significant reduction in risk of delirium. The potential effect of cointerventions and the optimal strategy for improving sleep hygiene and associated effect on patient-centered outcomes remains uncertain.