Suppr超能文献

实施 2013 年疼痛、躁动/镇静、谵妄或 2018 年疼痛、躁动/镇静、谵妄、活动受限、睡眠障碍指南推荐的策略对临床的影响:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Clinical Impact of the Implementation Strategies Used to Apply the 2013 Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium or 2018 Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, Sleep Disruption Guideline Recommendations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, University of Kentucky HealthCare, Lexington, KY.

Department of Pharmacy, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 2024 Apr 1;52(4):626-636. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000006178. Epub 2024 Jan 9.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the effectiveness of implementation strategies for ICU execution of recommendations from the 2013 Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium (PAD) or 2018 PAD, Immobility, Sleep Disruption (PADIS) guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from January 2012 to August 2023. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020175268).

STUDY SELECTION

Articles were included if: 1) design was randomized or cohort, 2) adult population evaluated, 3) employed recommendations from greater than or equal to two PAD/PADIS domains, and 4) evaluated greater than or equal to 1 of the following outcome(s): short-term mortality, delirium occurrence, mechanical ventilation (MV) duration, or ICU length of stay (LOS).

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently reviewed articles for eligibility, number of PAD/PADIS domains, quality according to National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute assessment tools, implementation strategy use (including Assess, prevent, and manage pain; Both SAT and SBT; Choice of analgesia and sedation; Delirium: assess, prevent, and manage; Early mobility and exercise; Family engagement and empowerment [ABCDEF] bundle) by Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) category, and clinical outcomes. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Among the 25 of 243 (10.3%) full-text articles included ( n = 23,215 patients), risk of bias was high in 13 (52%). Most studies were cohort ( n = 22, 88%). A median of 5 (interquartile range [IQR] 4-7) EPOC strategies were used to implement recommendations from two (IQR 2-3) PAD/PADIS domains. Cohort and randomized studies were pooled separately. In the cohort studies, use of EPOC strategies was not associated with a change in mortality (risk ratio [RR] 1.01; 95% CI, 0.9-1.12), or delirium (RR 0.92; 95% CI, 0.82-1.03), but was associated with a reduction in MV duration (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.84 d; 95% CI, -1.25 to -0.43) and ICU LOS (WMD -0.77 d; 95% CI, -1.51 to 0.04). For randomized studies, EPOC strategy use was associated with reduced mortality and MV duration but not delirium or ICU LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Using multiple implementation strategies to adopt PAD/PADIS guideline recommendations may reduce mortality, duration of MV, and ICU LOS. Further prospective, controlled studies are needed to identify the most effective strategies to implement PAD/PADIS recommendations.

摘要

目的

总结实施 ICU 执行 2013 年疼痛、躁动/镇静、谵妄(PAD)或 2018 年 PAD、活动受限、睡眠障碍(PADIS)指南建议的实施策略的有效性。

数据来源

从 2012 年 1 月至 2023 年 8 月,在 PubMed、CINAHL、Scopus 和 Web of Science 上进行了检索。该方案已在 PROSPERO(CRD42020175268)中注册。

研究选择

如果符合以下标准,则纳入文章:1)设计为随机或队列研究,2)评估成年人群,3)采用了大于或等于两个 PAD/PADIS 领域的推荐意见,以及 4)评估了以下至少一项结果:短期死亡率、谵妄发生率、机械通气(MV)持续时间或 ICU 住院时间(LOS)。

数据提取

两名作者独立审查文章的入选标准、使用的 PAD/PADIS 领域数量、根据美国国立心肺血液研究所评估工具评估的质量、实施策略的使用(包括评估、预防和管理疼痛;SAT 和 SBT 均采用;选择镇痛和镇静药物;谵妄:评估、预防和管理;早期活动和运动;家庭参与和授权[ABCDEF]方案)、按照 Cochrane 有效实践和组织护理(EPOC)类别以及临床结果。使用 Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation 评估证据的确定性。

数据综合

在纳入的 25 篇(243 篇中的 10.3%)全文文章中(n=23215 名患者),有 13 篇(52%)的偏倚风险较高。大多数研究为队列研究(n=22,88%)。中位数使用了 5 个(四分位距[IQR]4-7)EPOC 策略来实施来自两个(IQR 2-3)PAD/PADIS 领域的建议。分别对队列研究和随机研究进行了汇总。在队列研究中,使用 EPOC 策略与死亡率(风险比[RR]1.01;95%CI,0.9-1.12)或谵妄(RR 0.92;95%CI,0.82-1.03)无变化相关,但与 MV 持续时间(加权均数差[WMD]-0.84d;95%CI,-1.25 至-0.43)和 ICU LOS(WMD-0.77d;95%CI,-1.51 至 0.04)减少相关。对于随机研究,EPOC 策略的使用与死亡率和 MV 持续时间的降低相关,但与谵妄或 ICU LOS 无关。

结论

使用多种实施策略来采用 PAD/PADIS 指南建议可能会降低死亡率、MV 持续时间和 ICU LOS。需要进一步进行前瞻性、对照研究,以确定实施 PAD/PADIS 建议的最有效策略。

相似文献

5
Management of pain, agitation, and delirium in critically ill patients.危重症患者疼痛、躁动及谵妄的管理
Pol Arch Med Wewn. 2014;124(3):114-23. doi: 10.20452/pamw.2136. Epub 2014 Dec 10.

本文引用的文献

9
A Scoping Review of Implementation Science in Adult Critical Care Settings.成人重症监护环境中实施科学的范围综述。
Crit Care Explor. 2020 Dec 16;2(12):e0301. doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000000301. eCollection 2020 Dec.

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