Article

Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials on daily sedation interruption for critically ill adult patients

Intensive Care Unit, Royal Perth Hospital and School of Population Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Anaesthesia and intensive care (Impact Factor: 1.47). 05/2011; 39(3):401-9.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Sedation is often used to improve comfort, reduce anxiety and stress and to facilitate nursing care of critically ill patients in the intensive care unit. This meta-analysis examined the benefits and risks of daily sedation interruption in critically ill adult patients. A total of five randomised controlled trials, comparing daily sedation interruption with no interruption in 699 critically ill patients, from the Cochrane controlled trials register, Embase and MEDLINE databases (1966 to April 2010) were identified and subject to meta-analysis. With the limited data available, daily sedation interruption was not associated with a significant reduction in duration of mechanical ventilation, length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, or mortality. Daily sedation interruption was associated with a reduced risk of requiring tracheostomy (odds ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.35 to 0.92, P = 0.02; F = 3%) but not an increased risk of removal of the endotracheal tube by the patients (odds ratio 1.3, 95% confidence interval 0.41 to 4.10, P = 0.65; F = 49%). The current evidence suggests that daily sedation interruption appears to be safe, but the significant heterogeneity and small sample sizes of the existing studies suggest that large randomised controlled studies with long-term survival follow-up are needed before daily sedation interruption can be recommended as a standard sedation practice for critically ill adult patients.

1 Follower
 · 
662 Views
  • Source
    • "However, others have shown that interrupting sedation on a daily basis can increase the rate of unplanned extubation, causing long-term psychological complications in these patients. Consequently, the application of the daily interruption of sedation has not been used extensively [4]. This study analysed randomized controlled trials on daily interruption of sedation using metaanalysis . "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the effectiveness of daily sedation interruption in patients with mechanical ventilation in intensive care unit (ICU).
    11/2014; 1(4). DOI:10.1016/j.ijnss.2014.10.011
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Le changement des pratiques de sédation-analgésie en réanimation au cours de la dernière décennie s’est illustré à la fois par l’utilisation de nouveaux médicaments mais aussi par de nouvelles stratégies d’administration de la sédation, comme l’administration protocolisée par l’équipe infirmière et l’épreuve d’arrêt quotidien. La mise en place de l’une ou l’autre de ces deux stratégies a démontré son efficacité pour réduire non seulement la durée de ventilation mécanique et de séjour en réanimation mais aussi la mortalité à six mois pour l’une des études. Si l’arrêt quotidien de la sédation est une stratégie aisée à mettre en œuvre au niveau individuel de chaque médecin, la mise en place d’un protocole de sédation requiert au contraire la formation de l’ensemble de l’équipe infirmière. Cette formation a pour objectif de maîtriser d’une part les outils cliniques permettant de standardiser la mesure subjective du niveau de sédation et de douleur, et d’autre part le protocole proprement dit dont la complexité peut être variable. Le protocole de sédation et son épreuve d’arrêt quotidien ont été évalués dans la littérature, le plus souvent de façon intriquée, et il n’est pas possible de déterminer précisément si l’une ou l’autre de ces stratégies est plus efficace ou plus faisable. Ces stratégies devraient être considérées comme complémentaires et ne devraient pas être opposées l’une à l’autre. En effet, si la sédation-analgésie doit être protocolisée au sein de l’équipe afin d’en éviter le surdosage au moment de son administration, l’équipe médicale devrait aussi rechercher quotidiennement les critères indiquant son arrêt afin d’éviter sa prolongation inutile. Des études cliniques sont encore nécessaires pour mieux préciser les critères précis d’arrêt de la sédation. L’impact de la prise en charge de la douleur et des troubles neuropsychologiques à l’arrêt de la sédation devrait également être déterminé plus précisément. La formation de l’équipe infirmière tant à la gestion de la sédation que de son arrêt paraît fondamentale.
    Réanimation 09/2012; 21(5). DOI:10.1007/s13546-012-0511-8
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Continuous sedation infusions can lead to prolonged treatment with mechanical ventilation (MV), resulting in serious complications. Spontaneous awakening trials (SATs) and spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) are strategies that limit the amount of sedative agents a patient receives and promote extubation. The objective of this performance improvement project was to evaluate the outcomes of an evidence-based practice protocol that included SATs and SBTs on the duration of treatment with MV, ventilator utilization ratio (VUR), intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), and incidence of self-extubations and reintubations. A convenience sample of 112 discharged patients' medical records was used for this descriptive, comparative secondary data analysis. An evidence-based SAT/SBT practice protocol was designed by a multidisciplinary team and implemented. Three months after the implementation, a retrospective medical record review was conducted to evaluate patient outcomes. The median duration of treatment with MV was significantly lower in the postprotocol group (3.8 days vs 2.7 days, U = 1222, Z = -2.013, P = .04, r = 0.19). A significant decrease was found in the VUR (0.68 vs 0.52, U = 2.5, Z = -2.293, P = .02, r = 0.69). No difference was found in the ICU LOS and frequency of self-extubation or reintubation after a self-extubation between the preprotocol and postprotocol groups. Ten of 45 SAT opportunities (22%) and 67 of 130 SBT opportunities (52%) were missed by the nurse or the respiratory therapist. The duration of treatment with MV and the VUR were reduced in patients who received the SAT/SBT protocol. The incidence of self-extubation was not different when an SAT was implemented. The ICU LOS was not reduced in patients who received SATs and SBTs.
    AACN Advanced Critical Care 01/2014; 25(1):33-42. DOI:10.1097/NCI.0000000000000011
Show more