RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This Rapid Practice Guideline (RPG) aimed to provide evidencebased recommendations for ketamine analgo-sedation (monotherapy and adjunct) versus non-ketamine sedatives or usual care in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients on invasive mechanical ventilation (iMV) and to identify knowledge gaps for future research. METHODS: The RPG panel comprised 23 multinational multidisciplinary panelists, including a patient representative. An up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis constituted the evidence base. The Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach, and the evidence-to-decision framework were used to assess the certainty of evidence and to move from evidence to decision/recommendation. The panel provided input on the balance of the desirable and undesirable effects, certainty of evidence, patients' values and preferences, costs, resources, equity, feasibility, acceptability, and research priorities. RESULTS: Data from 17 randomized clinical trials (n=898) and 9 observational studies (n=1934) were included. There was considerable uncertainty about the desirable and undesirable effects of ketamine monotherapy for analgo-sedation. The evidence was very low certainty and downgraded for risk of bias, indirectness, and inconsistency. Uncertainty or variability in values and preferences were identified. Costs, resources, equity, and acceptability were considered varied. Adjunctive ketamine therapy had no effect on mortality (within 28 days) (relative risk [RR] 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76 to 1.27; low certainty), and may slightly reduce iMV duration (days) (mean difference [MD] -0.05 days; 95% CI -0.07 to -0.03; low certainty), and uncertain effect on the cumulative dose of opioids (mcg/kg/h morphine equivalent) (MD -11.6; 95% CI -20.4 to -2.7; very low certainty). Uncertain desirable effects (cumulative dose of sedatives and vasopressors) and undesirable effects (adverse event rate, delirium, arrhythmia, hepatotoxicity, hypersalivation, use of physical restraints) were also identified. A possibility of important uncertainty or variability in patient-important outcomes led to a balanced effect that favored neither the intervention nor the comparison. Cost, resources, and equity were considered varied. CONCLUSION: The RPG panel provided two conditional recommendations and suggested (1) against using ketamine as monotherapy analgo-sedation in critically ill adults on iMV when other analgo-sedatives are available; and (2) using ketamine as an adjunct to non-ketamine usual care sedatives (e.g., opioids, propofol, dexmedetomidine) or continuing with non-ketamine usual care sedatives alone. Large-scale trials should provide additional evidence.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This Rapid Practice Guideline (RPG) aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for ketamine analgo-sedation (monotherapy and adjunct) versus non-ketamine sedatives or usual care in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients on invasive mechanical ventilation (iMV) and to identify knowledge gaps for future research. METHODS: The RPG panel comprised 23 multinational multidisciplinary panelists, including a patient representative. An up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis constituted the evidence base. The Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach, and the evidence-to-decision framework were used to assess the certainty of evidence and to move from evidence to decision/recommendation. The panel provided input on the balance of the desirable and undesirable effects, certainty of evidence, patients' values and preferences, costs, resources, equity, feasibility, acceptability, and research priorities. RESULTS: Data from 17 randomized clinical trials (n = 898) and nine observational studies (n = 1934) were included. There was considerable uncertainty about the desirable and undesirable effects of ketamine monotherapy for analgo-sedation. The evidence was very low certainty and downgraded for risk of bias, indirectness, and inconsistency. Uncertainty or variability in values and preferences were identified. Costs, resources, equity, and acceptability were considered varied. Adjunctive ketamine therapy had no effect on mortality (within 28 days) (relative risk [RR] 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76 to 1.27; low certainty), and may slightly reduce iMV duration (days) (mean difference [MD] -0.05 days; 95% CI -0.07 to -0.03; low certainty), and uncertain effect on the cumulative dose of opioids (mcg/kg/h morphine equivalent) (MD -11.6; 95% CI -20.4 to -2.7; very low certainty). Uncertain desirable effects (cumulative dose of sedatives and vasopressors) and undesirable effects (adverse event rate, delirium, arrhythmia, hepatotoxicity, hypersalivation, use of physical restraints) were also identified. A possibility of important uncertainty or variability in patient-important outcomes led to a balanced effect that favored neither the intervention nor the comparison. Cost, resources, and equity were considered varied. CONCLUSION: The RPG panel provided two conditional recommendations and suggested (1) against using ketamine as monotherapy analgo-sedation in critically ill adults on iMV when other analgo-sedatives are available; and (2) using ketamine as an adjunct to non-ketamine usual care sedatives (e.g., opioids, propofol, dexmedetomidine) or continuing with non-ketamine usual care sedatives alone. Large-scale trials should provide additional evidence.
RESUMEN
Rationale: The SPICE III (Sedation Practice in Intensive Care Evaluation) trial reported significant heterogeneity in mortality with dexmedetomidine treatment. Supplemental propofol was commonly used to achieve desirable sedation. Objectives: To quantify the association of different infusion rates of dexmedetomidine and propofol, given in combination, with mortality and to determine if this is modified by age. Methods: We included 1,177 patients randomized in SPICE III to receive dexmedetomidine and given supplemental propofol, stratified by age (>65 or ⩽65 yr). We used double stratification analysis to produce quartiles of steady infusion rates of dexmedetomidine while escalating propofol dose and vice versa. We used Cox proportional hazard and multivariable regression adjusted for relevant clinical variable to evaluate the association of sedative dose with 90-day mortality. Measurements and Main Results: Younger patients (598 of 1,177 [50.8%]) received significantly higher doses of both sedatives compared with older patients to achieve comparable sedation depth. On double stratification analysis, escalating infusion rates of propofol to 1.27 mg/kg/h at a steady dexmedetomidine infusion rate (0.54 µg/kg/h) was associated with reduced adjusted mortality in younger but not older patients. This was consistent with multivariable regression modeling (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.78; P < 0.0001) adjusted for baseline risk and interaction with dexmedetomidine dose. In contrast, among younger patients, using multivariable regression, escalating dexmedetomidine infusion rate was associated with increased adjusted mortality (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.65; P = 0.029). Conclusions: In patients ⩽65 years of age sedated with dexmedetomidine and propofol combination, preferentially increasing the dose of propofol was associated with decreased adjusted 90-day mortality. Conversely, increasing dexmedetomidine may be associated with increased mortality. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01728558).
Asunto(s)
Dexmedetomidina , Propofol , Humanos , Propofol/efectos adversos , Dexmedetomidina/efectos adversos , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Respiración Artificial , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/efectos adversos , Estudios de CohortesRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To identify the best population, design of the intervention, and to assess between-group biochemical separation, in preparation for a future phase III trial. DESIGN: Investigator-initiated, parallel-group, pilot randomized double-blind trial. SETTING: Eight ICUs in Australia, New Zealand, and Japan, with participants recruited from April 2021 to August 2022. PATIENTS: Thirty patients greater than or equal to 18 years, within 48 hours of admission to the ICU, receiving a vasopressor, and with metabolic acidosis (pH < 7.30, base excess [BE] < -4 mEq/L, and Pa co2 < 45 mm Hg). INTERVENTIONS: Sodium bicarbonate or placebo (5% dextrose). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULT: The primary feasibility aim was to assess eligibility, recruitment rate, protocol compliance, and acid-base group separation. The primary clinical outcome was the number of hours alive and free of vasopressors on day 7. The recruitment rate and the enrollment-to-screening ratio were 1.9 patients per month and 0.13 patients, respectively. Time until BE correction (median difference, -45.86 [95% CI, -63.11 to -28.61] hr; p < 0.001) and pH correction (median difference, -10.69 [95% CI, -19.16 to -2.22] hr; p = 0.020) were shorter in the sodium bicarbonate group, and mean bicarbonate levels in the first 24 hours were higher (median difference, 6.50 [95% CI, 4.18 to 8.82] mmol/L; p < 0.001). Seven days after randomization, patients in the sodium bicarbonate and placebo group had a median of 132.2 (85.6-139.1) and 97.1 (69.3-132.4) hours alive and free of vasopressor, respectively (median difference, 35.07 [95% CI, -9.14 to 79.28]; p = 0.131). Recurrence of metabolic acidosis in the first 7 days of follow-up was lower in the sodium bicarbonate group (3 [20.0%] vs. 15 [100.0%]; p < 0.001). No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The findings confirm the feasibility of a larger phase III sodium bicarbonate trial; eligibility criteria may require modification to facilitate recruitment.
Asunto(s)
Acidosis , Bicarbonato de Sodio , Humanos , Bicarbonato de Sodio/uso terapéutico , Proyectos Piloto , Acidosis/tratamiento farmacológico , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Australia , Método Doble CiegoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Central venous access device (CVAD) is a common procedure in ICU which, although generally safe, can lead to acute and delayed complications. Training and accreditation process for its insertion vary worldwide. AIMS: The objective of this study was to explore variability in existing training and accreditation processes for central venous access device (CVAD) insertion among different intensive care units (ICU), current practices of CVAD insertion among fellows of the College of Intensive Care Medicine (CICM) working in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) and their recommendations for improvement. METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional web-based survey was sent through email and CICM e-newsletter to intensivists and directors of ICU across ANZ. All responses were tabulated, post-hoc exploratory analysis using multivariable ordinal logistic regression was used and free texts were analysed thematically and summarised. RESULTS: A total of 115 responses was received from various public and private ICU from all states of ANZ; 32% of the participants did not have any accreditation process for CVAD insertion skill in their ICU, whereas 91% of respondents revealed there were no processes to assess deskilling. Most intensivists recommended supervision, simulation, various education tools and ultrasound training to improve training and assessment. Thirty-five percent of the participants inserted 0-5 CVAD and more than half of the intensivists had inserted <10 CVAD in a 1-year period. Two-thirds of the respondents recommended inserting between 6 and 20 CVAD each year to maintain competence. CONCLUSION: The study identified wide variability in current practice, training methods and accreditation process for CVAD insertion among intensivists and ICU trainees in ANZ. Policy makers should consider revising the current clinical practice and training policies to new policies for accreditation and ongoing assessment for CVAD insertions across ANZ ICU.
Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Venoso Central , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Humanos , Adulto , Nueva Zelanda , Estudios Transversales , Estudios Prospectivos , AustraliaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Establishing sequela following critical illness is a public health priority; however, recruitment and retention of this cohort make assessing functional outcomes difficult. Completing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) via telephone may improve participant and researcher involvement; however, there is little evidence regarding the correlation of PROMs to performance-based outcome measures in critical care survivors. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between self-reported and performance-based measures of function in survivors of critical illness. METHODS: This was a nested cohort study of patients enrolled within a previously published study determining predictors of disability-free survival. Spearman's correlation (rs) was calculated between four performance-based outcomes (the Functional Independence Measure [FIM], 6-min walk distance [6MWD], Functional Reach Test [FRT], and grip strength) that were collected during a home visit 6 months following their intensive care unit admission, with two commonly used PROMs (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Scale 2.0 12 Level [WHODAS 2.0] and EuroQol-5 Dimension-5 Level [EQ-5D-5L]) obtained via phone interview (via the PREDICT study) at the same time point. RESULTS: There were 38 PROMs obtained from 40 recruited patients (mean age = 59.8 ± 16 yrs, M:F = 24:16). All 40 completed the FIM and grip strength, 37 the 6MWD, and 39 the FRT. A strong correlation was found between the primary outcome of the WHODAS 2.0 with all performance-based outcomes apart from grip strength where a moderate correlation was identified. Although strong correlations were also established between the EQ-5D-5L utility score and the FIM, 6MWD, and FRT, it only correlated weakly with grip strength. The EQ-5D overall global health rating only had very weak to moderate correlations with the performance-based outcomes. CONCLUSION: The WHODAS 2.0 correlated stronger across multiple performance-based outcome measures of functional recovery and is recommended for use in survivors of critical illness.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crítica , Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Sobrevivientes , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Cuidados Críticos , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Introduction: N95 respirators, together with eye protection, form vital elements of personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare workers (HCW) caring for patients with respiratory infections, such as COVID-19. Duckbill N95 respirators are widely used but have a high failure rate when Fit Tested. The commonest site for inward leaks is the region between the nose and maxilla. Safety goggles with an elastic headband may press the upper rim of the respirator against the face, thereby reducing inward leaks. We hypothesized that the use of safety goggles with an elastic headband will improve the overall fit-factor of a duckbill N95 respirator and increase the proportion of users who pass a quantitative Fit Test. Methods: About 60 volunteer HCWs, who had previously failed quantitative Fit Testing with a duckbill N95 respirator, participated in this before-and-after intervention study. A PortaCount® 8048 was used for quantitative Fit Testing. The test was first performed with a duckbill N95 respirator only. It was then repeated after participants donned a pair of safety goggles (3M Fahrenheit, ID 70071531621). Results: Before the intervention, i.e., with the respirator only, 8 (13.3%) participants passed their Fit Test. This increased to 49 (81.7%) after the application of safety goggles (OR 42, 95% CI 7.14-1697.9, p < 0.0001). The adjusted mean overall fit factor, using Tobit regression analysis, increased from 40.3 to 193.0 (t = 12.32, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The use of safety goggles with an elastic headband significantly increases the proportion of users who pass a quantitative Fit Test and improves the fit-factor of a duckbill N95 respirator. How to cite this article: Kamal M, Bhatti M, Stewart WC, Johns M, Collins D, Shehabi Y, et al. Safety Goggles with Elastic Headband to Improve N95 Fit Following Failed Quantitative Fit Test. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(6):386-391.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Dexmedetomidine produces sedation while maintaining a degree of arousability and may reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation and delirium among patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). The use of dexmedetomidine as the sole or primary sedative agent in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation has not been extensively studied. METHODS: In an open-label, randomized trial, we enrolled critically ill adults who had been undergoing ventilation for less than 12 hours in the ICU and were expected to continue to receive ventilatory support for longer than the next calendar day to receive dexmedetomidine as the sole or primary sedative or to receive usual care (propofol, midazolam, or other sedatives). The target range of sedation-scores on the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (which is scored from -5 [unresponsive] to +4 [combative]) was -2 to +1 (lightly sedated to restless). The primary outcome was the rate of death from any cause at 90 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 4000 patients at a median interval of 4.6 hours between eligibility and randomization. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis involving 3904 patients, the primary outcome event occurred in 566 of 1948 (29.1%) in the dexmedetomidine group and in 569 of 1956 (29.1%) in the usual-care group (adjusted risk difference, 0.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -2.9 to 2.8). An ancillary finding was that to achieve the prescribed level of sedation, patients in the dexmedetomidine group received supplemental propofol (64% of patients), midazolam (3%), or both (7%) during the first 2 days after randomization; in the usual-care group, these drugs were administered as primary sedatives in 60%, 12%, and 20% of the patients, respectively. Bradycardia and hypotension were more common in the dexmedetomidine group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing mechanical ventilation in the ICU, those who received early dexmedetomidine for sedation had a rate of death at 90 days similar to that in the usual-care group and required supplemental sedatives to achieve the prescribed level of sedation. More adverse events were reported in the dexmedetomidine group than in the usual-care group. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and others; SPICE III ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01728558.).
Asunto(s)
Sedación Consciente , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Dexmedetomidina , Hipnóticos y Sedantes , Respiración Artificial , Adulto , Anciano , Bradicardia/inducido químicamente , Enfermedad Crítica/mortalidad , Dexmedetomidina/efectos adversos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Humanos , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/efectos adversos , Hipotensión/inducido químicamente , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Masculino , Midazolam , Persona de Mediana Edad , Propofol , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Sedative agents may variably impact the stress response. Dexmedetomidine is a sympatholytic alpha2-adrenergic agonist mainly used as a second-line sedative agent in mechanically ventilated patients. We hypothesised that early sedation with dexmedetomidine as the primary agent would result in a reduced stress response compared to usual sedatives in critically ill ventilated adults. METHODS: This was a prospective sub-study nested within a multi-centre randomised controlled trial of early sedation with dexmedetomidine versus usual care. The primary outcome was the mean group differences in plasma levels of stress response biomarkers measured over 5 days following randomisation. Other hormonal, biological and physiological parameters were collected. Subgroup analyses were planned for patients with proven or suspected sepsis. RESULTS: One hundred and three patients were included in the final analysis. Baseline illness severity (APACHE II score), the proportion of patients receiving propofol and the median dose of propofol received were comparable between groups. More of the usual-care patients received midazolam (57.7% vs 33.3%; p = 0.01) and at higher dose (median (95% interquartile range) 0.46 [0.20-0.93] vs 0.14 [0.08-0.38] mg/kg/day; p < 0.01). The geometric mean (95% CI) plasma level of the stress hormones, adrenaline (0.32 [0.26-0.4] vs 0.38 [0.31-0.48]), noradrenaline (4.27 [3.12-5.85] vs 6.2 [4.6-8.5]), adrenocorticotropic hormone (17.1 [15.1-19.5] vs 18.1 [15.9-20.5]) and cortisol (515 [409-648] vs 618 [491-776)] did not differ between dexmedetomidine and usual-care groups, respectively. There were no significant differences in any other assayed biomarkers or physiological parameters Sensitivity analyses showed no effect of age or sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: Early sedation with dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative agent in mechanically ventilated critically ill adults resulted in comparable changes in physiological and blood-borne parameters associated with the stress-response as with usual-care sedation.
Asunto(s)
Dexmedetomidina , Propofol , Sepsis , Adulto , Humanos , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Dexmedetomidina/farmacología , Dexmedetomidina/uso terapéutico , Propofol/farmacología , Propofol/uso terapéutico , Sedación Consciente/métodos , Estudios Prospectivos , Respiración Artificial , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/farmacología , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/uso terapéutico , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos alfa 2RESUMEN
In the ideal intensive care unit (ICU) of the future, all patients are free from delirium, a syndrome of brain dysfunction frequently observed in critical illness and associated with worse ICU-related outcomes and long-term cognitive impairment. Although screening for delirium requires limited time and effort, this devastating disorder remains underestimated during routine ICU care. The COVID-19 pandemic brought a catastrophic reduction in delirium monitoring, prevention, and patient care due to organizational issues, lack of personnel, increased use of benzodiazepines and restricted family visitation. These limitations led to increases in delirium incidence, a situation that should never be repeated. Good sedation practices should be complemented by novel ICU design and connectivity, which will facilitate non-pharmacological sedation, anxiolysis and comfort that can be supplemented by balanced pharmacological interventions when necessary. Improvements in the ICU sound, light control, floor planning, and room arrangement can facilitate a healing environment that minimizes stressors and aids delirium prevention and management. The fundamental prerequisite to realize the delirium-free ICU, is an awake non-sedated, pain-free comfortable patient whose management follows the A to F (A-F) bundle. Moreover, the bundle should be expanded with three additional letters, incorporating humanitarian care: gaining (G) insight into patient needs, delivering holistic care with a 'home-like' (H) environment, and redefining ICU architectural design (I). Above all, the delirium-free world relies upon people, with personal challenges for critical care teams to optimize design, environmental factors, management, time spent with the patient and family and to humanize ICU care.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Cuidados Críticos , Enfermedad Crítica , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados IntensivosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Previous case series reported an association between dexmedetomidine use and hyperthermia. Temperature data have not been systematically reported in previous randomized controlled trials evaluating dexmedetomidine. A causal link between dexmedetomidine administration and elevated temperature has not been demonstrated. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis. SETTING: Four ICUs in Australia and New Zealand. PATIENTS: About 703 mechanically ventilated ICU patients. INTERVENTIONS: Early sedation with dexmedetomidine versus usual care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was mean daily body temperature. Secondary outcomes included the proportions of patients with body temperatures greater than or equal to 38.3°C and greater than or equal to 39°C, respectively. Outcomes were recorded for 5 days postrandomization in the ICU. The mean daily temperature was not different between the dexmedetomidine (n = 351) and usual care (n = 352) groups (36.84°C ± sd vs 36.78°C ± sd; p = 0.16). Over the first 5 ICU days, more dexmedetomidine group (vs usual care) patients had a temperature greater than or equal to 38.3°C (43.3% vs 32.7%, p = 0.004; absolute difference 10.6 percentage points) and greater than or equal to 39.0°C (19.4% vs 12.5%, p = 0.013; absolute difference 6.9 percentage points). Results were similar after adjusting for diagnosis, admitting temperature, age, weight, study site, sepsis occurrence, and the time from dexmedetomidine initiation to first hyperthermia recorded. There was a significant dose response relationship with temperature increasing by 0.30°C ±0.08 for every additional 1 µg/kg/hr of dexmedetomidine received p < 0.0002. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests potentially important elevations in body temperature are associated with early dexmedetomidine sedation, in adults who are mechanically ventilated in the ICU.
Asunto(s)
Temperatura Corporal/efectos de los fármacos , Dexmedetomidina/farmacología , Hipertermia/inducido químicamente , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/farmacología , Anciano , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Dexmedetomidina/efectos adversos , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Femenino , Humanos , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/efectos adversos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Respiración Artificial , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of sedative medication use in critically ill adults undergoing mechanical ventilation differ considerably in their methodological approach. This heterogeneity impedes the ability to compare results across studies. The Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research Recommendations convened a meeting of multidisciplinary experts to develop recommendations for key methodologic elements of sedation trials in the ICU to help guide academic and industry clinical investigators. DESIGN: A 2-day in-person meeting was held in Washington, DC, on March 28-29, 2019, followed by a three-round, online modified Delphi consensus process. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six participants from academia, industry, and the Food and Drug Administration with expertise in relevant content areas, including two former ICU patients attended the in-person meeting, and the majority completed an online follow-up survey and participated in the modified Delphi process. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The final recommendations were iteratively refined based on the survey results, participants' reactions to those results, summaries written by panel moderators, and a review of the meeting transcripts made from audio recordings. Fifteen recommendations were developed for study design and conduct, subject enrollment, outcomes, and measurement instruments. Consensus recommendations included obtaining input from ICU survivors and/or their families, ensuring adequate training for personnel using validated instruments for assessments of sedation, pain, and delirium in the ICU environment, and the need for methodological standardization. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations are intended to assist researchers in the design, conduct, selection of endpoints, and reporting of clinical trials involving sedative medications and/or sedation protocols for adult ICU patients who require mechanical ventilation. These recommendations should be viewed as a starting point to improve clinical trials and help reduce methodological heterogeneity in future clinical trials.
Asunto(s)
Hipnóticos y Sedantes/farmacocinética , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/uso terapéutico , Congresos como Asunto , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , District of Columbia , Humanos , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/farmacología , Respiración Artificial/instrumentación , Respiración Artificial/métodos , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Metabolic acidosis is a major complication of critical illness. However, its current epidemiology and its treatment with sodium bicarbonate given to correct metabolic acidosis in the ICU are poorly understood. METHOD: This was an international retrospective observational study in 18 ICUs in Australia, Japan, and Taiwan. Adult patients were consecutively screened, and those with early metabolic acidosis (pH < 7.3 and a Base Excess < -4 mEq/L, within 24-h of ICU admission) were included. Screening continued until 10 patients who received and 10 patients who did not receive sodium bicarbonate in the first 24 h (early bicarbonate therapy) were included at each site. The primary outcome was ICU mortality, and the association between sodium bicarbonate and the clinical outcomes were assessed using regression analysis with generalized linear mixed model. RESULTS: We screened 9437 patients. Of these, 1292 had early metabolic acidosis (14.0%). Early sodium bicarbonate was given to 18.0% (233/1292) of these patients. Dosing, physiological, and clinical outcome data were assessed in 360 patients. The median dose of sodium bicarbonate in the first 24 h was 110 mmol, which was not correlated with bodyweight or the severity of metabolic acidosis. Patients who received early sodium bicarbonate had higher APACHE III scores, lower pH, lower base excess, lower PaCO2, and a higher lactate and received higher doses of vasopressors. After adjusting for confounders, the early administration of sodium bicarbonate was associated with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.44 to 1.62) for ICU mortality. In patients with vasopressor dependency, early sodium bicarbonate was associated with higher mean arterial pressure at 6 h and an aOR of 0.52 (95% CI, 0.22 to 1.19) for ICU mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Early metabolic acidosis is common in critically ill patients. Early sodium bicarbonate is administered by clinicians to more severely ill patients but without correction for weight or acidosis severity. Bicarbonate therapy in acidotic vasopressor-dependent patients may be beneficial and warrants further investigation.
Asunto(s)
Acidosis/tratamiento farmacológico , Bicarbonato de Sodio/administración & dosificación , APACHE , Acidosis/epidemiología , Anciano , Australia/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/organización & administración , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Internacionalidad , Japón/epidemiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Bicarbonato de Sodio/farmacología , Bicarbonato de Sodio/uso terapéutico , Taiwán/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
In the critically ill patient, optimal pain and sedation management remains the cornerstone of achieving comfort, safety, and to facilitate complex life support interventions. Pain relief, using multimodal analgesia, is an integral component of any orchestrated approach to achieve clinically appropriate goals in critically ill patients. Sedative management, however, remains a significant challenge. Subsequent studies including most recent randomized trials have failed to provide strong evidence in favor of a sedative agent, a mode of sedation or ancillary protocols such as sedative interruption and sedative minimization. In addition, clinical practice guidelines, despite a comprehensive evaluation of relevant literature, have limitations when applied to individual patients. These limitations have been most apparent during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. As such, there is a need for a mindset shift to a practical and achievable sedation strategy, driven by patients' characteristics and individual patient needs, rather than one cocktail for all patients. In this review, we present key principles to achieve patient-and symptom-oriented optimal analgesia and sedation in the critically ill patients. Sedative intensity should be proportionate to care complexity with due consideration to an individual patient's modifiers. The use of multimodal analgesics, sedatives, and antipsychotics agents-that are easily titratable-reduces the overall quantum of sedatives and opioids, and reduces the risk of adverse events while maximizing clinical benefits. In addition, critical considerations regarding the choice of sedative agents should be given to factors such as age, medical versus operative diagnosis, and cardiovascular status. Specific populations such as trauma, neurological injury, and pregnancy should also be taken into account to maximize efficacy and reduce adverse events.
Asunto(s)
Analgesia/métodos , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/administración & dosificación , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Analgésicos/administración & dosificación , COVID-19 , Enfermedad Crítica , Humanos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Older patients have a less pronounced immune response to infection, which may also influence infection biomarkers. There is currently insufficient data regarding clinical effects of procalcitonin (PCT) to guide antibiotic treatment in older patients. OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN: We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to investigate the association of age on effects of PCT-guided antibiotic stewardship regarding antibiotic use and outcome. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We had access to 9,421 individual infection patients from 28 randomized controlled trials comparing PCT-guided antibiotic therapy (intervention group) or standard care. We stratified patients according to age in four groups (<75 years [n = 7,079], 75-80 years [n = 1,034], 81-85 years [n = 803] and >85 years [n = 505]). The primary endpoint was the duration of antibiotic treatment and the secondary endpoints were 30-day mortality and length of stay. RESULTS: Compared to control patients, mean duration of antibiotic therapy in PCT-guided patients was significantly reduced by 24, 22, 26 and 24% in the four age groups corresponding to adjusted differences in antibiotic days of -1.99 (95% confidence interval [CI] -2.36 to -1.62), -1.98 (95% CI -2.94 to -1.02), -2.20 (95% CI -3.15 to -1.25) and - 2.10 (95% CI -3.29 to -0.91) with no differences among age groups. There was no increase in the risk for mortality in any of the age groups. Effects were similar in subgroups by infection type, blood culture result and clinical setting (P interaction >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This large individual patient data meta-analysis confirms that, similar to younger patients, PCT-guided antibiotic treatment in older patients is associated with significantly reduced antibiotic exposures and no increase in mortality.
Asunto(s)
Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Polipéptido alfa Relacionado con Calcitonina , Anciano , Algoritmos , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Humanos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
AIM AND OBJECTIVE: Fogging of eyeglasses while wearing N95 respirators is common. It is commonly held that the N95 respirator has a poor fit if there is fogging of eyeglasses. We conducted this prospective, pilot study to determine if fogging of eyeglasses predicts poor fit of N95 respirator. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy volunteer healthcare workers from a tertiary intensive care unit in Sydney, Australia participated. The participants donned one of the following N95 respirators: three-panel flat-fold respirator (3M 1870), cup-shaped respirator (3M 1860), or a duckbill respirator. After a satisfactory "user seal check" as recommended by the manufacturer, the participants donned eyeglasses and checked for fogging. A quantitative fit test (QnFT) of the respirator was then performed (using PortaCount Respirator Fit Tester 8048, TSI Inc., Minnesota, USA). A fit factor of <100 on quantitative fit testing indicates poor fit. The sensitivity and specificity for fogging of eyeglasses (index test) to predict the poor fit of N95 respirator was determined, compared to QnFT (gold standard test). RESULTS: Fogging of eyeglasses as a predictor of poor respirator fit (i.e., fit factor <100 on QnFT) had sensitivity of 71% (95% CI, 54-85%) and specificity 46% (95% CI, 29-63%). The odds ratio of fogging as a predictor for poor fit was 2.10 (95% CI, 0.78-5.67), with a two-tailed p-value of 0.22 (not significant). The receiver operating characteristic curve for fogging of eyeglasses as a diagnostic test had the area under the curve of 0.59. CONCLUSION: Fogging of eyeglasses is neither a sensitive nor a specific predictor for poor fit of N95 respirators. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Kyaw S, Johns M, Lim R, Stewart WC, Rojas N, Thambiraj SR, et al. Prediction of N95 Respirator Fit from Fogging of Eyeglasses: A Pilot Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(9):976-980.
RESUMEN
N95 respirators and safety goggles are important components of personal protective equipment to reduce the spread of airborne infections, such as COVID-19, among healthcare workers. Poor N95 respirator seal may reduce its protective effect, thereby increasing transmission. Quantitative fit testing is an established way of assessing the N95 respirator fit, which provides a quantitative measure for seal, called the fit factor. Duckbill N95 respirators frequently fail the fit test. We hypothesized that using safety goggles with a wraparound elastic headband will increase their fit-factor by reinforcing the seal between the face and the upper margin of the respirator. We studied the effect of safety goggles with a wraparound elastic headband (3M™ Chemical Splash Resistant Goggles, ID 70006982741) on the fit factor of two types of Duckbill N95 respirators (Halyard FLUIDSHIELD*3, Model 99SA070M, and ProShield® N95 Model TN01-11) in 63 healthy volunteers in a nonrandomized, before-and-after intervention study design. The mean fit factor increased from 69.4 to 169.1 increased from 17/63 (27%) to 46/63 (73%) after the intervention (p <0.0001, OR 3 [95% CI = 4.9-1223]). This is the first study to explore the impact of safety goggles on N95 respirator fit. We conclude that the use of safety goggles with a wraparound elastic headband increases the fit factor of the tested Duckbill N95 respirators. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Johns M, Kyaw S, Lim R, Stewart WC, Thambiraj SR, Shehabi Y, et al. Fit Factor Change on Quantitative Fit Testing of Duckbill N95 Respirators with the Use of Safety Goggles. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(9):981-986.
RESUMEN
Objectives: Patients with impaired kidney function have a significantly slower decrease of procalcitonin (PCT) levels during infection. Our aim was to study PCT-guided antibiotic stewardship and clinical outcomes in patients with impairments of kidney function as assessed by creatinine levels measured upon hospital admission. Methods: We pooled and analyzed individual data from 15 randomized controlled trials who were randomly assigned to receive antibiotic therapy based on a PCT-algorithms or based on standard of care. We stratified patients on the initial glomerular filtration rate (GFR, ml/min/1.73 m2) in three groups (GFR >90 [chronic kidney disease; CKD 1], GFR 15-89 [CKD 2-4] and GFR<15 [CKD 5]). The main efficacy and safety endpoints were duration of antibiotic treatment and 30-day mortality. Results: Mean duration of antibiotic treatment was significantly shorter in PCT-guided (n=2,492) compared to control patients (n=2,510) (9.5-7.6 days; adjusted difference in days -2.01 [95% CI, -2.45 to -1.58]). CKD 5 patients had overall longer treatment durations, but a 2.5-day reduction in treatment duration was still found in patients receiving in PCT-guided care (11.3 vs. 8.6 days [95% CI -3.59 to -1.40]). There were 397 deaths in 2,492 PCT-group patients (15.9%) compared to 460 deaths in 2,510 control patients (18.3%) (adjusted odds ratio, 0.88 [95% CI 0.78 to 0.98)]. Effects of PCT-guidance on antibiotic treatment duration and mortality were similar in subgroups stratified by infection type and clinical setting (p interaction >0.05). Conclusions: This individual patient data meta-analysis confirms that the use of PCT in patients with impaired kidney function, as assessed by admission creatinine levels, is associated with shorter antibiotic courses and lower mortality rates.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Biomarcadores/sangre , Mortalidad/etnología , Polipéptido alfa Relacionado con Calcitonina/sangre , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/mortalidad , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos , Utilización de Medicamentos , Femenino , Hospitalización , Humanos , Riñón , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Septic shock is associated with decreased vasopressor responsiveness. Experimental data suggest that central alpha2-agonists like dexmedetomidine (DEX) increase vasopressor responsiveness and reduce catecholamine requirements in septic shock. However, DEX may also cause hypotension and bradycardia. Thus, it remains unclear whether DEX is hemodynamically safe or helpful in this setting. METHODS: In this post hoc subgroup analysis of the Sedation Practice in Intensive Care Evaluation (SPICE III) trial, an international randomized trial comparing early sedation with dexmedetomidine to usual care in critically patients receiving mechanical ventilation, we studied patients with septic shock admitted to two tertiary ICUs in Australia and Switzerland. The primary outcome was vasopressor requirements in the first 48 h after randomization, expressed as noradrenaline equivalent dose (NEq [µg/kg/min] = noradrenaline + adrenaline + vasopressin/0.4). RESULTS: Between November 2013 and February 2018, 417 patients were recruited into the SPICE III trial at both sites. Eighty-three patients with septic shock were included in this subgroup analysis. Of these, 44 (53%) received DEX and 39 (47%) usual care. Vasopressor requirements in the first 48 h were similar between the two groups. Median NEq dose was 0.03 [0.01, 0.07] µg/kg/min in the DEX group and 0.04 [0.01, 0.16] µg/kg/min in the usual care group (p = 0.17). However, patients in the DEX group had a lower NEq/MAP ratio, indicating lower vasopressor requirements to maintain the target MAP. Moreover, on adjusted multivariable analysis, higher dexmedetomidine dose was associated with a lower NEq/MAP ratio. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with septic shock, patients in the DEX group received similar vasopressor doses in the first 48 h compared to the usual care group. On multivariable adjusted analysis, dexmedetomidine appeared to be associated with lower vasopressor requirements to maintain the target MAP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The SPICE III trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01728558 ).
Asunto(s)
Dexmedetomidina/efectos adversos , Choque Séptico/tratamiento farmacológico , Vasoconstrictores/administración & dosificación , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Sedación Profunda/métodos , Dexmedetomidina/farmacología , Dexmedetomidina/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/efectos adversos , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/farmacología , Hipnóticos y Sedantes/uso terapéutico , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/organización & administración , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Respiración Artificial , Estudios Retrospectivos , Choque Séptico/fisiopatología , Suiza , Vasoconstrictores/uso terapéutico , VictoriaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a sedation protocol using dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative in mechanically ventilated critically ill children. DESIGN: Open-label, pilot, prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. The primary outcome was the proportion of sedation scores in the target sedation range in the first 48 hours. Safety outcomes included device removal, adverse events, and vasopressor use. Feasibility outcomes included time to randomization and protocol fidelity. SETTING: Six tertiary PICUs in Australia and New Zealand. PATIENTS: Critically ill children, younger than 16 years old, requiring intubation and mechanical ventilation and expected to be mechanically ventilated for at least 24 hours. INTERVENTIONS: Children randomized to dexmedetomidine received a dexmedetomidine-based algorithm targeted to light sedation (State Behavioral Scale -1 to +1). Children randomized to usual care received sedation as determined by the treating clinician (but not dexmedetomidine), also targeted to light sedation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sedation with dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative resulted in a greater proportion of sedation measurements in the light sedation range (State Behavioral Scale -1 to +1) over the first 48 hours (229/325 [71%] vs 181/331 [58%]; p = 0.04) and the first 24 hours (66/103 [64%] vs 48/116 [41%]; p < 0.001) compared with usual care. Cumulative midazolam dosage was significantly reduced in the dexmedetomidine arm compared with usual care (p = 0.002).There were more episodes of hypotension and bradycardia with dexmedetomidine (including one serious adverse event) but no difference in vasopressor requirements. Median time to randomization after intubation was 6.0 hours (interquartile range, 2.0-9.0 hr) in the dexmedetomidine arm compared with 3.0 hours (interquartile range, 1.0-7.0 hr) in the usual care arm (p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: A sedation protocol using dexmedetomidine as the primary sedative was feasible, appeared safe, achieved early, light sedation, and reduced midazolam requirements. The findings of this pilot study justify further studies of sedative agents in critically ill children.