Bodine Kelly M, Beckman Elizabeth J
Department of Pharmacy (KMB), Grady Health System, Atlanta, GA.
Department of Pharmacy (EJB), University of Kentucky HealthCare, Lexington, KY.
J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther. 2024 Aug;29(4):368-374. doi: 10.5863/1551-6776-29.4.368. Epub 2024 Aug 13.
The Society of Critical Care Medicine released the first guideline for the prevention and -management of pain, agitation, neuromuscular blockade, and delirium in critically ill pediatric patients but offered conditional recommendations for sedation practices and monitoring during neuromuscular blockade. This study aimed to characterize sedation practices, patient awareness, and depth of blockade with neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) infusion administration in a single pediatric and cardiac intensive care unit.
This retrospective chart review of critically ill pediatric patients queried orders for continuous infusion NMBA. Analgosedation agent(s), dose, and dose changes were assessed, along with depth of blockade monitoring via Train of Four (TOF) and awareness via Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS).
Thirty-one patients were included, of which 27 (87%) had a documented sedation agent infusing at time of NMBA initiation and 17 patients (54%) were receiving analgesia. The most common agents used were rocuronium (n = 28), dexmedetomidine (n = 23), and morphine (n = 14). RASS scores were captured in all patients; however, 9 patients (29%) had recorded positive scores and 1 patient (3%) never achieved negative scores. TOF was only captured for 11 patients (35%), with majority of the scores being 0 or 4.
Majority of the study population did not receive recommended depth of blockade monitoring via TOF. Similarly, RASS scores were not consistent with deep sedation in half of the patients. The common use of dexmedetomidine as a single sedation agent calls into question the appropriateness of current sedation practices during NMBA continuous infusions.
危重病医学学会发布了首份关于危重症儿科患者疼痛、躁动、神经肌肉阻滞和谵妄预防与管理的指南,但对神经肌肉阻滞期间的镇静措施和监测给出了有条件的建议。本研究旨在描述在单一儿科和心脏重症监护病房中,使用神经肌肉阻滞剂(NMBA)输注给药时的镇静措施、患者意识及阻滞深度。
对危重症儿科患者进行回顾性病历审查,查询持续输注NMBA的医嘱。评估镇痛镇静药物、剂量及剂量变化,同时通过四个成串刺激(TOF)评估阻滞深度,并通过里士满躁动镇静量表(RASS)评估意识。
纳入31例患者,其中27例(87%)在开始使用NMBA时有记录显示正在输注镇静药物,17例(54%)正在接受镇痛治疗。最常用的药物是罗库溴铵(n = 28)、右美托咪定(n = 23)和吗啡(n = 14)。所有患者均记录了RASS评分;然而,9例患者(29%)记录为阳性评分,1例患者(3%)从未达到阴性评分。仅11例患者(35%)记录了TOF,大多数评分为0或4。
大多数研究对象未接受推荐的通过TOF监测阻滞深度的方法。同样,半数患者的RASS评分与深度镇静不一致。右美托咪定作为单一镇静药物的普遍使用,让人质疑当前NMBA持续输注期间镇静措施的合理性。