Suppr超能文献

镇静与舒适度观察量表与脑电双频指数评分之间的相关性

Correlation Between Observational Scales of Sedation and Comfort and Bispectral Index Scores.

作者信息

Barbato Michael, Barclay Greg, Potter Jan, Yeo Wilf, Chung Joseph

机构信息

Palliative Care Services, Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District, Wollongong, NSW, Australia.

Palliative Care Services, Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District, Wollongong, NSW, Australia; School of Medicine, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.

出版信息

J Pain Symptom Manage. 2017 Aug;54(2):186-193. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.12.335. Epub 2017 Jan 5.

Abstract

CONTEXT

When palliative care patients enter the phase of unconsciousness preceding death, it is standard practice to initiate or continue a subcutaneous infusion of an opioid plus or minus a sedative. The doses are determined somewhat empirically and adjustments are based on clinical assessment and observational measures of sedation and comfort. Following reports that these observational measures could be misleading, this study assesses their validity by comparing them with an objective measure of sedation, the Bispectral Index Score (BIS).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the validity of the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) and the Patient Comfort Score (PCS) in assessing sedation and comfort in unconscious patients.

METHODS

Forty eligible and consenting patients were monitored from the onset of unconsciousness (unresponsiveness) until death. Measures of sedation (RASS) and comfort (PCS) were made by the attending nurse every four hours. Correlation coefficients examined the relationship between fourth hourly RASS and PCS and time-matched BISs.

RESULTS

A significant correlation was found between RASS and BIS and PCS and BIS. Sedation and comfort scores were concentrated at the lower end of the respective scales, whereas time-matched BISs were widely scattered with scores ranging from near full awareness to deep sedation.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with BIS, both RASS and PCS appear to be relatively blunt instruments at the lower end of their respective scales. Due caution should be taken interpreting and making clinical decisions based solely on the RASS and PCS and, by extension, other observational measures of patient comfort and sedation.

摘要

背景

当姑息治疗患者进入临终前的昏迷阶段时,启动或持续皮下注射阿片类药物(加或不加镇静剂)是标准做法。剂量在一定程度上是根据经验确定的,调整基于临床评估以及对镇静和舒适度的观察指标。在有报告称这些观察指标可能产生误导之后,本研究通过将其与镇静的客观指标脑电双频指数(BIS)进行比较来评估其有效性。

目的

本研究的目的是确定里士满躁动镇静量表(RASS)和患者舒适度评分(PCS)在评估昏迷患者的镇静和舒适度方面的有效性。

方法

对40名符合条件并同意参与的患者从昏迷(无反应)开始直至死亡进行监测。主治护士每四小时进行一次镇静(RASS)和舒适度(PCS)测量。相关系数用于检验每四小时的RASS和PCS与时间匹配的BIS之间的关系。

结果

发现RASS与BIS以及PCS与BIS之间存在显著相关性。镇静和舒适度评分集中在各自量表的较低端,而时间匹配的BIS则分布广泛,分数范围从接近完全清醒到深度镇静。

结论

与BIS相比,RASS和PCS在各自量表的较低端似乎都是相对粗略的工具。在仅基于RASS和PCS以及由此延伸的其他患者舒适度和镇静观察指标进行解释和做出临床决策时应谨慎。

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