Yaghmai Beryl F, Di Gennaro Jane L, Irby Gretchen A, Deeter Kristina H, Zimmerman Jerry J
1Department of Critical Care Medicine, Wesley Children's Hospital, Wichita, KS. 2Department of Critical Care Medicine, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA. 3Department of Pharmacy, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA. 4Department of Critical Care Medicine, Joe DiMaggio Children's Hospital, Hollywood, FL.
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2016 Aug;17(8):721-6. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000000846.
To reevaluate the effect of a nursing-driven sedation protocol for mechanically ventilated patients on analgesic and sedative medication dosing durations. We hypothesized that lack of continued quality improvement efforts results in increased sedation exposure, as well as mechanical ventilation days, and ICU length of stay.
Quasi-experimental, uncontrolled before-after study.
Forty-five-bed tertiary care, medical-surgical-cardiac PICU in a metropolitan university-affiliated children's hospital.
Children requiring mechanical ventilation longer than 48 hours not meeting exclusion criteria.
During both the intervention and postintervention periods, analgesia and sedation were managed by nurses following an algorithm-based sedation protocol with a targeted comfort score.
The intervention cohort includes patients admitted during a 12-month period following initial protocol implementation in 2008-2009 (n = 166). The postintervention cohort includes patients meeting identical inclusion and exclusion criteria admitted during a 12-month period in 2012-2013 (n = 93). Median duration of total sedation days (IV plus enteral) was 5 days for the intervention period and 10 days for the postintervention period (p < 0.0001). The postintervention cohort received longer duration of mechanical ventilation (6 vs 5 d; p = 0.0026) and ICU length of stay (10 vs 8.5 d; p = 0.0543). After adjusting for illness severity and cardiac and surgical status, Cox proportional hazards regression analysis demonstrated that at any point in time, patients in the postintervention group were 58% more likely to be receiving sedation (hazard ratio, 1.58; p < 0.001) and 34% more likely to remain in the ICU (hazard ratio, 1.34; p = 0.019).
Sedation quality improvement measures related to the use of opiate infusions, total days of sedation exposure, PICU length of stay, and mechanical ventilation days all deteriorated following initial successful implementation of a PICU sedation protocol. Implementation of a protocol alone may not lead to sustained quality improvement without routine monitoring and ongoing education to ensure effectiveness.
重新评估由护理主导的镇静方案对机械通气患者镇痛和镇静药物给药持续时间的影响。我们假设,缺乏持续的质量改进措施会导致镇静暴露时间增加,以及机械通气天数和重症监护病房(ICU)住院时间延长。
类实验性、非对照前后对照研究。
一所大城市大学附属医院中拥有45张床位的三级医疗、内科-外科-心脏重症监护病房。
需要机械通气超过48小时且不符合排除标准的儿童。
在干预期和干预后期,护士按照基于算法的镇静方案并以目标舒适度评分管理镇痛和镇静。
干预队列包括在2008 - 2009年首次实施方案后的12个月期间收治的患者(n = 166)。干预后期队列包括在2012 - 2013年12个月期间收治的符合相同纳入和排除标准的患者(n = 93)。干预期总镇静天数(静脉加肠内)的中位数为5天,干预后期为10天(p < 0.0001)。干预后期队列的机械通气时间更长(6天对5天;p = 0.0026),ICU住院时间更长(10天对8.5天;p = 0.0543)。在对疾病严重程度、心脏和手术状况进行调整后,Cox比例风险回归分析表明,在任何时间点,干预后期组的患者接受镇静的可能性高58%(风险比,1.58;p < 0.001),留在ICU的可能性高34%(风险比,1.34;p = 0.019)。
在重症监护病房镇静方案初步成功实施后,与阿片类药物输注使用、镇静暴露总天数、重症监护病房住院时间和机械通气天数相关的镇静质量改进措施均有所恶化。仅实施方案可能不会带来持续的质量改进,而需要进行常规监测和持续教育以确保有效性。