[Pain assessment of tracheal suctioning on brain injury patients by pain behavioral indicator scale (ESCID)]. / Valoración del dolor en la aspiración de secreciones traqueales en pacientes con traumatismo craneal mediante la Escala de conductas indicadoras de dolor (ESCID).

OBJECTIVE: To assess pain response on patients with moderate to severe head injury before a common nursing procedure: tracheal suctioning. MATERIAL AND METHOD: An observational longitudinal pilot study with consecutive sampling performed from September to December of 2012. Pain was assessed by a pain behavioral indicator scale 5 minutes before, meanwhile and 15 minutes after tracheal suctioning the days 1, 3 and 6 of their intensive care unit (ICU) stay, as well as a non-painful procedure: rubbing with gauze the forearm of the patient. Pseudo-analgesia and hemodynamic variables were also recorded. Descriptive analysis of the variables, inferential statistics with t-student and Anova with SPSS 17.0; statistical tests were considered significant if the critical level observed was less than 5% (P<.05). RESULTS: Pain was assessed on 27 patients. 82% suffered from severe head trauma and 18% moderate. The average pain value during nursing procedure day 1 was 3, 18±2.6, day 3: 2, 59±2 and day 6: 3, 94±2.3. There was a significant increase in mean pain while performing suctioning during the three days of assessment (P<.05); however no significant differences between the average pain value on the three days of the assessment (P>.05) were shown. Data for the painless procedure were significantly different on day 6 (P<.05) CONCLUSION: During tracheal suctioning in patients with head injury in the first 6 days in the ICU, objective mild-moderate pain according to ESCID scale has been detected.

[Analysis of constipation in severe trauma patients]. / Análisis del estreñimiento en pacientes con traumatismo grave.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the incidence and risk factors of constipation in patients with severe trauma (ST). MATERIALS AND METHOD: A retrospective observational study (January-December 2011) of medical records in ST-patients with a minimum stay of 5 days was performed. Descriptive analysis of variables, inferential analysis: Student's T test and Chi-square of SPSS 17.0. Significance level P<.05. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria, but only 69 could be analyzed. Of these, 84.06% showed constipation (according to its definition by the Work Group for Metabolism and Nutrition SEMICYUC). The most frequent day of first stool was day 7 and 9 after tolerance of enteral nutrition. Statistical significance (S.S.) of constipation was found with stay, days of sedation/relaxation/opiates, and mechanical ventilation. There was no S.S. between early enteral nutrition (EEN) and constipation (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: There is a very high incidence of constipation in ST patients. ICU stay, days of analgesic sedation, relaxation, and mechanical ventilation are risk factors that influence the occurrence of this problem. Laxatives should be prescribed prophylactically.

[Audit of the bedside monitor alarms in a critical care unit]. / Auditoría de las alarmas del monitor de cabecera en una unidad de cuidados críticos.

AIMS: Quantifying and evaluating the response to the bedside monitor alarms (BMA) by nurses in intensive care unit (ICU). METODOLOGY: Prospective observational study (October 2011-January 2012). Randomized blind audit on alarm management. Alarm programming and alarm limits were related to experience in ICU. We evaluated the response to BMA with the variables: alarm type (relevant/not relevant/alert) and response type. Descriptive analysis of variables for multivariate ANOVA and Chi-square test with SPSS 17.0. RESULTS: 434 audits were analyzed. The programming was: Blood pressure (BP) 88.25%, heart rate (HR) 98.62% O(2) saturation (SO) 96.79%, respiratory rate (FR) 65.75%. The alarms originated were BP 49.73%, 10.75% HR, 39.25% SO, 3.27% FS. The nurse responded to 93.3% of them and 50% were treated before 10 sec. 56.16% of the alarms were not relevant, 25.12% relevant and 18.72% alerting. 41.8% were due to handling. CONCLUSION: The alarms are programmed/attended by the nurse and there is uniformity in programming/selection limits. 25% of BMA carried therapeutic attitude.

[Pain behaviour indicator scale (ESCID) application in severe non-communicative trauma patients receiving mechanical ventilation]. / Aplicación de la Escala de conductas indicadoras de dolor (ESCID) en el paciente con trauma grave no comunicativo y ventilación mecánica.

OBJECTIVE: To assess pain in non-communicative patients with severe trauma undergoing mechanical ventilation prior to, during and after tracheal suctioning, mobilization and wound care. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A prospective and observational study from October to December 2011 was performed. Study variables were ESCID scale and monitoring of vital signs (blood pressure, heart rate, and respiratory rate). Data were gathering 5 minutes before, during and 15 minutes after the 3 procedures. The nursing evolutive report recorded pain assessment, administration and effectiveness of the analgesia. Descriptive analysis of variables included Student's T test/ANOVA for multivariate analysis with SPSS 17.0. RESULTS: A hundred eighty four observations: 46.8% tracheal suctioning, 38.5% mobilization and 14.7% wound care were performed in 29 patients. ESCID score was 0.4±1 before, 3.4±2.7 during and 0.4±1 after for wound care; 0.4±1.1 before, 3.6±2.2 during and 1.1±0.5 for tracheal suctioning; 0.5±1.1 before, 3±2.8 during and 0.2±0.8 after for mobilization. These increased significantly during the performance of the 3 procedures before-during/during-after: P=.000. All the hemodynamic variables were significantly modified during mobilization and tracheal suctioning: before-during/during-after: P=.000, with the exception of the cures that only affected respiratory rate. 27% of the procedures received analgesia: 9% received it before, 15% during and 3.2% after, with more analgesia being required for the wound care (33.3%). The data collected in the nursing report on the evaluation of pain/effectiveness of the analgesia showed 20.66%. CONCLUSION: An increase on the ESCID score was observed while performing the procedures.

[Evaluation of the compliance of semirecumbent position between 30-45° in intubated patients]. / Evaluación del cumplimiento de cabeceros elevados entre 30-45° en pacientes intubados.

AIMS: To determine compliance of the standard "semirecumbent position between 30-45° in patients with artificial airway (AA)". To know the opinion of the professionals on this issue. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An observational, prospective study was carried out in December 2009 in the ICU department of a tertiary hospital that excluded the limitation of therapeutic effort, prone position and antitrendelemburg. DATA COLLECTED: headrest angle, professional experience of the nurse, shift, perception of the auditor, diagnostic, type of AA (tracheostomy or endotracheal tube), mechanical ventilation (MV) (yes/no) and enteral nutrition (EN). Nurses were surveyed to verify if they knew the standard, if they complied with it, the method used and their suggestions. We used the Student's t test and ANOVA for multivariable analysis, and Fisher's χ2; p<0.05=significant. RESULTS: A total of 546 valid measurements were obtained from 53 patients, of which 40.9% had the correct semirecumbent position (30-45°). Professionals with <1 year of experience were those who raised the headrest the least, with only 26.4% of these measurements over 30°. The standard was met in only 34.8% of the neurocritical patients (NC) vs non NC (46.7%) (p<0.05). It was <30° in 29.2% of patients with tracheostomy vs 44% measurements performed on patients with TOT (p<0.05). There were no differences between shifts, the use of MV or EN. Diagnostic accuracy of the auditor: sensitivity: 91.6%; specificity: 72.5%; positive predictive value: 70.2%; negative predictive value (NPV): 92.4%. 97.9% of responders know the standard. Visual judgment was used in 97.2% of the cases. CONCLUSIONS: Measured compliance was less than 50% although the standard is well known by the nursing team. Even though the subjective perception has a high NPV, it does not achieve the standard.

[Diagnostic blood losses in severe trauma patients]. / Pérdidas sanguíneas diagnósticas en pacientes con trauma grave.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze diagnostic (blood drawings) and iatrogenic (Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy, CRRT) blood losses (BL) in severe trauma patients. METHOD: A one-year descriptive, prospective and observational study. We included patients over 15 years of age, admitted with severe trauma and who had a score of > or =16 on the Injury Severity Index (ISS). Those patients in whom limitation of therapeutic effort had been indicated were excluded. A total of 225 patients with 1619 days of evolution were analyzed for volume of BL/day/patient, type of diagnostic test, clinical outcome and utilization of CRRT. The variables were described as mean +/- standard deviation with the Student's T test. RESULTS: Average blood loss of patient per day was 55.5+/-32.2 cc. Statistically significant differences were found between the blood volume drawn when the first day was compared to the second day, 73.5+/-32.2 vs. 56.3+/-21.9 (p<0.001); clinical outcome (alive vs death) 54.8+/-33 vs. 60.7+/-24.9 (p<0.05); severity (ISS<31 or > or =31) 54.65+/-20 vs. 61.5+/-28.5 (p<0.001), No RRT vs RRT: 50.9+/-18.9 vs. 97.2+/-72.6 (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The greatest diagnostic BL occurs during the resuscitation phase, in the patients who die, in those with greater severity and those undergoing CRRT.

Does a history of psychoactive substances abuse play a role in the level of pain of the patient with severe trauma? / ¿Influyen los antecedentes de consumo de sustancias psicótropas en el nivel de dolor del paciente con traumatismo grave?

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the influence of psychotropic substance use on the level of pain in patients with severe trauma. DESIGN: Longitudinal analytical study. SCOPE: Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Trauma and Emergencies. PATIENTS: severe trauma, non-communicative and mechanical ventilation >48hours. Two groups of patients were created: users and non-users of psychotropic substances according to medical records. INTERVENTIONS: Measurement of pain level at baseline and during mobilization, using the Pain Indicator Behaviour Scale. VARIABLES: demographic characteristics, pain score, sedation level and type and dose of analgesia and sedation. RESULTS: Sample of 84 patients, 42 in each group. The pain level in both groups, during mobilisation, showed significant differences p=0.011, with a mean of 3.11(2.40) for the user group and 1.83(2.14) for the non-user group. A relative risk of 2.5 CI (1,014-6,163) was found to have moderate / severe pain in the user group compared to the non-user group. The mean dose of analgesia and continuous sedation was significantly higher in the user group: P=.032 and P=.004 respectively. There was no difference in bolus dose of analgesia and sedation with P=.624 and P=.690 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a history of consumption of psychoactive substances show higher levels of pain and experience a higher risk of this being moderate/severe compared to non-users despite receiving higher doses of analgesia and sedation infusion. Key words: pain, multiple trauma, drug users.