Suppr超能文献

早期目标导向镇静与机械通气危重症患者常规镇静的比较:一项初步研究*。

Early goal-directed sedation versus standard sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a pilot study*.

机构信息

University New South Wales, Clinical School of Medicine, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 2013 Aug;41(8):1983-91. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31828a437d.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility and safety of delivering early goal-directed sedation compared with standard sedation.

DESIGN

Pilot prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.

SETTING

Six ICUs.

PATIENTS

Critically ill adults mechanically ventilated for greater than 24 hours.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients randomized to early goal-directed sedation received a dexmedetomidine-based algorithm targeted to light sedation (Richmond Agitation Sedation Score of -2 to 1). Patients randomized to standard sedation received propofol and/or midazolam-based sedation as clinically appropriate.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The main feasibility outcomes were time to randomization and proportion of Richmond Agitation Sedation Score assessments in the first 48 hours in the light and deep sedation range. Safety outcomes were delirium-free days, vasopressor and physical restraints use, and device removal. Randomization occurred within a median (interquartile range) of 1.1 hours (0.46-1.9) after intubation or ICU admission for out of ICU intubation. Patients in the early goal-directed sedation (n = 21) mean (SD) Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score was 20.2 (6.2) versus 18.6 (8.8; p = 0.53) in the standard sedation (n = 16). A significantly higher proportion of patients was lightly sedated on days 1, 2, and 3 (12/19 [63.2%], 19/21 [90.5%], and 18/20 [90%] vs 2/14 [14.3%], 8/15 [53.3%], and 9/15 [60%]; p = 0.005, 0.011, 0.036) and more Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale assessments between (-2 and 1), in the first 48 hours (203/307 [66%] versus (74/197 [38%]; p = 0.01) in the early goal-directed sedation versus standard sedation, respectively. Early goal-directed sedation patients received midazolam on 6 of 173 (3.5%) versus 4 of 114 (3.5%) standard sedation patient-days when dexmedetomidine was given. Propofol was given to 16 of 21 (76%) of early goal-directed sedation versus 16 of 16 (100%) of standard sedation patients (p = 0.04). Early goal-directed sedation patients had 101 of 175 (58%) versus 54 of 114 (47%; p = 0.27) delirium-free days and required significantly less physical restraints 1 (5%) versus 5 (31%; p = 0.03) than standard sedation patients. There were no differences in vasopressor use and self-extubation.

CONCLUSIONS

Delivery of early goal-directed sedation was feasible, appeared safe, achieved early light sedation, minimized benzodiazepines and propofol, and decreased the need for physical restraints. The findings of this pilot study justify further investigation of early goal-directed sedation.

摘要

目的

评估与标准镇静相比,早期目标导向镇静的可行性和安全性。

设计

前瞻性、多中心、随机、对照试验。

地点

6 个 ICU。

患者

机械通气超过 24 小时的危重症成人。

干预措施

接受以右美托咪定为基础的算法镇静的患者随机分为早期目标导向镇静组,目标为轻度镇静(Richmond 躁动镇静评分-2 至 1)。接受丙泊酚和/或咪达唑仑镇静的患者随机分为标准镇静组,镇静方式根据临床情况而定。

测量和主要结果

主要可行性结局是随机化时间和在前 48 小时内轻、深镇静范围内进行 Richmond 躁动镇静评分评估的比例。安全性结局是无谵妄天数、血管加压药和身体约束的使用以及装置去除。对于 ICU 外插管,插管后或 ICU 入院后中位数(四分位距)1.1 小时(0.46-1.9)内进行随机分组。早期目标导向镇静组(n=21)的急性生理学和慢性健康评估 II 评分平均(SD)为 20.2(6.2),标准镇静组(n=16)为 18.6(8.8)(p=0.53)。在第 1、2 和 3 天,接受早期目标导向镇静的患者中有更高比例的患者接受轻度镇静(12/19 [63.2%]、19/21 [90.5%]和 18/20 [90%] vs 2/14 [14.3%]、8/15 [53.3%]和 9/15 [60%];p=0.005、0.011、0.036),在前 48 小时内 Richmond 躁动镇静评分更接近(-2 至 1)的评估也更多(203/307 [66%] vs 74/197 [38%];p=0.01),分别在早期目标导向镇静组和标准镇静组中。接受右美托咪定镇静的早期目标导向镇静组患者中,有 6 例(3.5%)接受咪达唑仑镇静,114 例(3.5%)标准镇静组患者接受咪达唑仑镇静。16 例(76%)接受早期目标导向镇静的患者接受丙泊酚镇静,16 例(100%)接受标准镇静的患者接受丙泊酚镇静(p=0.04)。早期目标导向镇静组患者有 101 例(58%)无谵妄天数,54 例(47%)标准镇静组患者无谵妄天数(p=0.27),需要的身体约束更少(1 例[5%] vs 5 例[31%];p=0.03)。两组血管加压药使用和自行拔管无差异。

结论

早期目标导向镇静的实施是可行的,似乎是安全的,可实现早期轻度镇静,最大限度减少苯二氮䓬类药物和丙泊酚的使用,并减少对身体约束的需求。这项初步研究的结果证明了进一步研究早期目标导向镇静的合理性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验