Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
CMAJ ; 192(12): E322, 2020 03 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32392518
2.
BMJ Open ; 11(7): e045087, 2021 07 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34285003

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: We examined the relationship between dominant sedation strategy, risk of delirium and patient-centred outcomes in adults admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). DESIGN: Retrospective propensity-matched cohort study. SETTING: Mechanically ventilated adults (≥ 18 years) admitted to four Canadian hospital medical/surgical ICUs from 2014 to 2016 in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 2837 mechanically ventilated adults (≥ 18 years) requiring admission to a medical/surgical ICU were evaluated for the relationship between sedation strategy and delirium. INTERVENTIONS: None. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary exposure was dominant sedation strategy, defined as the sedative infusion, including midazolam, propofol or fentanyl, with the longest duration before the first delirium assessment. The primary outcome was 'ever delirium' identified using the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist. Secondary outcomes included mortality, length of stay (LOS), ventilation duration and days with delirium. The cohort was analysed in two propensity score (patient characteristics and therapies received) matched cohorts (propofol vs fentanyl and propofol vs midazolam). RESULTS: 2837 patients (60.7% male; median age 57 years (IQR 43-68)) were considered for propensity matching. In propensity score-matched cohorts(propofol vs midazolam, n=712; propofol vs fentanyl, n=1732), the odds of delirium were significantly higher with midazolam (OR 1.46 (95% CI 1.06 to 2.00)) and fentanyl (OR 1.22 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.48)) compared with propofol dominant sedation strategies. Dominant sedation strategy with midazolam and fentanyl were associated with a longer duration of ventilation compared with propofol. Fentanyl was also associated with increased ICU mortality (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.12)) ICU and hospital LOS compared with a propofol dominant sedation strategy. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a novel association between fentanyl dominant sedation strategies and an increased risk of delirium, a composite outcome of delirium or death, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU LOS and hospital LOS. Midazolam dominant sedation strategies were associated with increased delirium risk and mechanical ventilation duration.


Asunto(s)
Delirio , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Adulto , Alberta , Estudios de Cohortes , Delirio/inducido químicamente , Delirio/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/efectos adversos , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Puntaje de Propensión , Respiración Artificial , Estudios Retrospectivos
3.
JAMA ; 302(17): 1872-9, 2009 Nov 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19822627

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: Between March and July 2009, the largest number of confirmed cases of 2009 influenza A(H1N1) infection occurred in North America. OBJECTIVE: To describe characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of critically ill patients in Canada with 2009 influenza A(H1N1) infection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: A prospective observational study of 168 critically ill patients with 2009 influenza A(H1N1) infection in 38 adult and pediatric intensive care units (ICUs) in Canada between April 16 and August 12, 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were 28-day and 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included frequency and duration of mechanical ventilation and duration of ICU stay. RESULTS: Critical illness occurred in 215 patients with confirmed (n = 162), probable (n = 6), or suspected (n = 47) community-acquired 2009 influenza A(H1N1) infection. Among the 168 patients with confirmed or probable 2009 influenza A(H1N1), the mean (SD) age was 32.3 (21.4) years; 113 were female (67.3%) and 50 were children (29.8%). Overall mortality among critically ill patients at 28 days was 14.3% (95% confidence interval, 9.5%-20.7%). There were 43 patients who were aboriginal Canadians (25.6%). The median time from symptom onset to hospital admission was 4 days (interquartile range [IQR], 2-7 days) and from hospitalization to ICU admission was 1 day (IQR, 0-2 days). Shock and nonpulmonary acute organ dysfunction was common (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment mean [SD] score of 6.8 [3.6] on day 1). Neuraminidase inhibitors were administered to 152 patients (90.5%). All patients were severely hypoxemic (mean [SD] ratio of Pao(2) to fraction of inspired oxygen [Fio(2)] of 147 [128] mm Hg) at ICU admission. Mechanical ventilation was received by 136 patients (81.0%). The median duration of ventilation was 12 days (IQR, 6-20 days) and ICU stay was 12 days (IQR, 5-20 days). Lung rescue therapies included neuromuscular blockade (28% of patients), inhaled nitric oxide (13.7%), high-frequency oscillatory ventilation (11.9%), extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (4.2%), and prone positioning ventilation (3.0%). Overall mortality among critically ill patients at 90 days was 17.3% (95% confidence interval, 12.0%-24.0%; n = 29). CONCLUSION: Critical illness due to 2009 influenza A(H1N1) in Canada occurred rapidly after hospital admission, often in young adults, and was associated with severe hypoxemia, multisystem organ failure, a requirement for prolonged mechanical ventilation, and the frequent use of rescue therapies.


Asunto(s)
Subtipo H1N1 del Virus de la Influenza A , Gripe Humana , Adolescente , Adulto , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Canadá/epidemiología , Niño , Preescolar , Comorbilidad , Enfermedad Crítica , Brotes de Enfermedades , Femenino , Humanos , Hipoxia/etiología , Lactante , Gripe Humana/complicaciones , Gripe Humana/diagnóstico , Gripe Humana/mortalidad , Gripe Humana/terapia , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Insuficiencia Multiorgánica/etiología , Insuficiencia Multiorgánica/mortalidad , Estudios Prospectivos , Respiración Artificial , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/etiología , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/mortalidad , Adulto Joven
4.
J Crit Care ; 29(3): 471.e1-9, 2014 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24629574

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to identify the self-reported barriers to and facilitators of prescribing low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) thromboprophylaxis in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: We conducted an interviewer-administered survey of 4 individuals per ICU (the ICU director, a bedside pharmacist, a thromboprophylaxis research coordinator, and physician site investigator) regarding LMWH thromboprophylaxis for medical-surgical patients in 27 ICUs in Canada and the United States. Items were generated by the research team and adapted from previous surveys, audits, qualitative studies, and quality improvement research. Respondents rated the barriers to LMWH use, facilitators (effectiveness, affordability, and acceptability thereof), and perceptions regarding LMWH use. RESULTS: Respondents had 14.5 (SD, 7.7) years of ICU experience (response rate, 99%). The 5 most common barriers in descending order were as follows: drug acquisition cost, fear of bleeding, lack of resident education, concern about bioaccumulation in renal failure, and habit. The top 5 rated facilitators were preprinted orders, education, daily reminders, audit and feedback, and local quality improvement committee endorsement. Centers using preprinted orders (mean difference [P<.01]) and computerized physician order entry (P<.01) compared with those centers not using those tools reported higher affordability for these 2 facilitators. Compared with physicians and pharmacists, research coordinators considered ICU-specific audit and feedback of thromboprophylaxis rates to be a more effective, acceptable, and affordable facilitator (odds ratio, 6.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.97-22.53; P<.01). Facilitator acceptability ratings were similar within centers but differed across centers (P≤.01). CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter survey found several barriers to use of LMWH including cost, concern about bleeding, and lack of resident knowledge of effectiveness. The diversity of reported facilitators suggests that large scale programs may address generic barriers but also need site-specific interprofessional knowledge translation activities.


Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Cuidados Críticos , Heparina de Bajo-Peso-Molecular/uso terapéutico , Trombosis/prevención & control , Anticoagulantes/economía , Anticoagulantes/farmacocinética , Canadá , Costos de los Medicamentos , Miedo , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Hemorragia/psicología , Heparina de Bajo-Peso-Molecular/economía , Heparina de Bajo-Peso-Molecular/farmacocinética , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Insuficiencia Renal/metabolismo , Autoinforme , Estados Unidos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA