Suppr超能文献

重症监护中镇静的质量评估。

Quality assessment of sedation in intensive care.

作者信息

Tallgren M, Pettilä V, Hynninen M

机构信息

Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Meilahti Hospital, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.

出版信息

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2006 Sep;50(8):942-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2006.01094.x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In the intensive care unit (ICU), analgesia and sedation are used to improve the comfort and safety of patients undergoing intensive care therapies. However, continuous administration of sedatives prolongs the time on mechanical ventilation and ICU stay. These adverse effects can be reduced by clear definition of the goals of sedation combined with a sedation protocol.

METHODS

The adherence to the local sedation guideline of a university affiliated ICU was monitored prospectively before and after intervention: reinforcement of the guideline. The primary endpoints of the study were the occurrence of daily interruption or tapering of sedation and achievement of the target Ramsay scale level (days: 2-3, nights: 3-4) according to the guideline.

RESULTS

Comparing sedation before and after the intervention (166 and 170 ICU days), no significant differences were observed in the occurrence of daily interruption or tapering of sedatives, 94/129 (73%) vs. 109/139 (78%) of sedation days, nor in the Ramsay scale level during the day, 4 (3-5) vs. 4 (3-5), or in the night, 5 (4-5) vs. 5 (4-5), respectively. After the intervention, Ramsay scale recordings were made more frequently, 280/398 (70%) vs. 234/380 (62%) of the nurses' shifts (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Adherence to the local sedation guideline was not high, and no significant change was seen after this simple intervention. Continuous education and discussion on the desirable and undesirable effects of sedation, followed by multidisciplinary re-evaluation of the current guideline, are due in our unit.

摘要

背景

在重症监护病房(ICU),镇痛和镇静用于提高接受重症监护治疗患者的舒适度和安全性。然而,持续使用镇静剂会延长机械通气时间和ICU住院时间。通过明确镇静目标并结合镇静方案可减少这些不良反应。

方法

前瞻性监测一所大学附属医院ICU在干预前后(强化指南)对当地镇静指南的依从性。研究的主要终点是根据指南每日中断或减少镇静的发生率以及达到目标Ramsay量表水平(白天:2 - 3级,夜间:3 - 4级)。

结果

比较干预前后的镇静情况(分别为166个和170个ICU日),在每日中断或减少镇静剂的发生率方面未观察到显著差异,镇静日分别为94/129(73%)和109/139(78%);白天Ramsay量表水平也无显著差异,分别为4(3 - 5)和4(3 - 5);夜间同样无显著差异,分别为5(4 - 5)和5(4 - 5)。干预后,Ramsay量表记录更频繁,护士班次记录分别为280/398(70%)和234/380(62%)(P < 0.01)。

结论

对当地镇静指南的依从性不高,且该简单干预后未观察到显著变化。我们科室应持续开展关于镇静的利弊的教育和讨论,随后对现行指南进行多学科重新评估。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验