Unidad de Bioestadística Clínica Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Instituto Ramón y Cajal de Investigaciones Sanitarias (IRYCIS) and Centro de Investigación en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain.
Intensive Care Med. 2015 Sep;41(9):1586-600. doi: 10.1007/s00134-015-3854-6. Epub 2015 May 14.
There are limited data available about the role of sedation and analgesia during noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV). The objective of study was to estimate the effect of analgesic or sedative drugs on the failure of NPPV.
We studied patients who received at least 2 h of NPPV as first-line therapy in a prospective observational study carried out in 322 intensive care units from 30 countries. A marginal structural model (MSM) was used to analyze the association between the use of analgesic or sedative drugs and NPPV failure (defined as need for invasive mechanical ventilation).
842 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 165 patients (19.6%) received analgesic or sedative drugs at some time during NPPV; 33 of them received both. In the adjusted analysis, the use of analgesics (odds ratio 1.8, 95% confidence interval 0.6-5.4) or sedatives (odds ratio 2.8, 95% CI 0.85-9.4) alone was not associated with NPPV failure, but their combined use was associated with failure (odds ratio 5.7, 95% CI 1.8-18.4).
Slightly less than 20% of patients received analgesic or sedative drugs during NPPV, with no apparent effect on outcome when used alone. However, the simultaneous use of analgesics and sedatives may be associated with failure of NPPV.
关于非侵入性正压通气(NPPV)期间镇静和镇痛的作用,目前可用的数据有限。本研究的目的是评估镇痛或镇静药物对 NPPV 失败的影响。
我们研究了在 30 个国家的 322 个重症监护病房进行的前瞻性观察性研究中,至少接受 2 小时 NPPV 一线治疗的患者。使用边缘结构模型(MSM)分析在 NPPV 失败(定义为需要有创机械通气)时使用镇痛或镇静药物与 NPPV 失败之间的关联。
共纳入 842 例患者进行分析。其中,165 例(19.6%)患者在 NPPV 期间的某个时间点接受了镇痛或镇静药物;其中 33 例同时接受了这两种药物。在调整分析中,单独使用镇痛药(比值比 1.8,95%置信区间 0.6-5.4)或镇静剂(比值比 2.8,95%置信区间 0.85-9.4)与 NPPV 失败无关,但两者联合使用与失败相关(比值比 5.7,95%置信区间 1.8-18.4)。
略低于 20%的患者在 NPPV 期间接受了镇痛或镇静药物,单独使用时对结果没有明显影响。然而,同时使用镇痛药和镇静剂可能与 NPPV 失败有关。