Suppr超能文献

用 ABCDEF 集束化方案关爱危重症患者:15000 多例成人患者的 ICU 解放协作研究结果。

Caring for Critically Ill Patients with the ABCDEF Bundle: Results of the ICU Liberation Collaborative in Over 15,000 Adults.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care, Critical Illness, Brain dysfunction, and Survivorship (CIBS) Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.

The Ohio State University, College of Nursing, Columbus, OH.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 2019 Jan;47(1):3-14. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003482.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Decades-old, common ICU practices including deep sedation, immobilization, and limited family access are being challenged. We endeavoured to evaluate the relationship between ABCDEF bundle performance and patient-centered outcomes in critical care.

DESIGN

Prospective, multicenter, cohort study from a national quality improvement collaborative.

SETTING

68 academic, community, and federal ICUs collected data during a 20-month period.

PATIENTS

15,226 adults with at least one ICU day.

INTERVENTIONS

We defined ABCDEF bundle performance (our main exposure) in two ways: 1) complete performance (patient received every eligible bundle element on any given day) and 2) proportional performance (percentage of eligible bundle elements performed on any given day). We explored the association between complete and proportional ABCDEF bundle performance and three sets of outcomes: patient-related (mortality, ICU and hospital discharge), symptom-related (mechanical ventilation, coma, delirium, pain, restraint use), and system-related (ICU readmission, discharge destination). All models were adjusted for a minimum of 18 a priori determined potential confounders.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Complete ABCDEF bundle performance was associated with lower likelihood of seven outcomes: hospital death within 7 days (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.32; CI, 0.17-0.62), next-day mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.28; CI, 0.22-0.36), coma (AOR, 0.35; CI, 0.22-0.56), delirium (AOR, 0.60; CI, 0.49-0.72), physical restraint use (AOR, 0.37; CI, 0.30-0.46), ICU readmission (AOR, 0.54; CI, 0.37-0.79), and discharge to a facility other than home (AOR, 0.64; CI, 0.51-0.80). There was a consistent dose-response relationship between higher proportional bundle performance and improvements in each of the above-mentioned clinical outcomes (all p < 0.002). Significant pain was more frequently reported as bundle performance proportionally increased (p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

ABCDEF bundle performance showed significant and clinically meaningful improvements in outcomes including survival, mechanical ventilation use, coma, delirium, restraint-free care, ICU readmissions, and post-ICU discharge disposition.

摘要

目的

几十年来,重症监护病房(ICU)中常见的镇静、固定和有限的家属探视等传统做法正面临挑战。我们试图评估 ABCDEF 集束干预方案实施情况与重症患者结局之间的关系。

设计

全国质量改进合作项目的前瞻性、多中心队列研究。

地点

68 家学术型、社区型和联邦型 ICU 在 20 个月期间收集数据。

患者

15226 例 ICU 住院时间至少 1 天的成年人。

干预

我们通过以下两种方式定义 ABCDEF 集束干预方案实施情况(我们的主要暴露因素):1)完全实施(患者在任何给定的一天接受了所有合格的集束干预方案);2)比例实施(任何给定的一天完成的合格集束干预方案比例)。我们探讨了完全和比例 ABCDEF 集束干预方案与三组结局之间的关联:患者相关结局(死亡率、ICU 出院和医院出院)、症状相关结局(机械通气、昏迷、谵妄、疼痛、约束使用)和系统相关结局(ICU 再入院、出院去向)。所有模型均经过至少 18 个预先确定的潜在混杂因素的最小调整。

测量和结果

完全 ABCDEF 集束干预方案与以下七个结局的可能性降低相关:7 天内院内死亡(校正风险比,0.32;95%置信区间,0.17-0.62)、次日机械通气(校正优势比,0.28;95%置信区间,0.22-0.36)、昏迷(校正优势比,0.35;95%置信区间,0.22-0.56)、谵妄(校正优势比,0.60;95%置信区间,0.49-0.72)、身体约束使用(校正优势比,0.37;95%置信区间,0.30-0.46)、ICU 再入院(校正优势比,0.54;95%置信区间,0.37-0.79)和出院至非家庭场所(校正优势比,0.64;95%置信区间,0.51-0.80)。随着比例集束方案实施比例的增加,上述每个临床结局均显示出显著的、具有临床意义的改善(均 P < 0.002)。随着集束方案实施比例的增加,疼痛明显更频繁地被报告(P = 0.0001)。

结论

ABCDEF 集束干预方案的实施情况与包括生存率、机械通气使用率、昏迷、谵妄、无约束护理、ICU 再入院率和 ICU 出院后去向等在内的结局显著改善相关。

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