Suppr超能文献

重症监护病房患者舒适度:一项多中心、两国镇痛、镇静和谵妄管理的现况调查研究。

Patient comfort in the intensive care unit: a multicentre, binational point prevalence study of analgesia, sedation and delirium management.

机构信息

Faculty of Health, University of Technology, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

出版信息

Crit Care Resusc. 2013 Sep;15(3):213-9.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To measure the prevalence of assessment and management practices for analgesia, sedation and delirium in patients in Australian and New Zealand intensive care units.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We developed survey items from a modified Delphi panel and included them in a binational, point prevalence study. We used a standard case report form to capture retrospective patient data on management of analgesia, sedation and delirium at the end of a 4-hour period on the study day. Other data were collected during independent assessment of patient status and medication requirements.

RESULTS

Data were collected on 569 patients in 41 ICUs. Pain assessment was documented in the 4 hours before study observation in 46% of patients. Of 319 assessable patients, 16% had moderate pain and 6% had severe pain. Routine sedation assessment using a scale was recorded in 63% of intubated and ventilated patients. When assessed, 38% were alert and calm, or drowsy and rousable, 22% were lightly to moderately sedated, 31% were deeply sedated (66% of these had a documented indication), and 9% were agitated or restless. Sedatives were titrated to a target level in 42% of patients. Routine assessment of delirium occurred in 3%, and at study assessment 9% had delirium. Wrist or arm restraints were used for 7% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Only two-thirds of sedated patients had their sedation levels formally assessed, half had pain assessed and very few had formal assessment of delirium. Our description of current practices, and other observational data, may help in planning further research in this area.

摘要

目的

测量澳大利亚和新西兰重症监护病房患者镇痛、镇静和谵妄评估和管理实践的流行率。

材料和方法

我们从改良 Delphi 小组开发了调查项目,并将其纳入一项两国、时点患病率研究。我们使用标准病例报告表在研究日的 4 小时后捕获管理镇痛、镇静和谵妄的回顾性患者数据。其他数据在独立评估患者状况和药物需求期间收集。

结果

在 41 个 ICU 中收集了 569 名患者的数据。在研究观察前的 4 小时内,46%的患者记录了疼痛评估。在 319 名可评估的患者中,16%有中度疼痛,6%有重度疼痛。使用量表对 63%的插管和通气患者进行常规镇静评估。当评估时,38%的患者清醒平静或嗜睡但易唤醒,22%轻度至中度镇静,31%深度镇静(其中 66%有记录的指征),9%烦躁不安。42%的患者将镇静剂滴定至目标水平。仅 3%的患者进行常规谵妄评估,在研究评估时,9%的患者出现谵妄。7%的患者使用手腕或手臂约束。

结论

只有三分之二的镇静患者的镇静水平得到正式评估,一半的患者接受疼痛评估,极少数患者接受正式的谵妄评估。我们对当前实践的描述和其他观察数据可能有助于规划该领域的进一步研究。

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