Showler Laurie, Deane Adam M, Litton Edward, Ankravs Melissa J, Wibrow Bradley, Barge Deborah, Goldin Jeremy, Hammond Naomi, Saxena Manoj K, Young Paul J, Venkatesh Bala, Finnis Mark, Abdelhamid Yasmine Ali
Department of Critical Care, Melbourne Medical School, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Intensive Care, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Crit Care Resusc. 2024 Jul 31;26(3):192-197. doi: 10.1016/j.ccrj.2024.06.009. eCollection 2024 Sep.
Critically ill patients suffer disrupted sleep. Hypnotic medications may improve sleep; however, local epidemiological data regarding the amount of nocturnal time awake and the use of such medications is needed.
Point prevalence study.
Adult ICUs in Australia and New Zealand.
All adult patients admitted to participating Intensive Care Units (ICUs) on the study day.
Time awake overnight (22:00-06:00) was determined by structured nurse observation. The use of enterally administered sedative-hypnotic drugs prior to and during ICU admission was recorded, as was the use of a unit policy and non-pharmacological sleep promotion strategies.
Data were available for 532 patients admitted to 40 ICUs (median age 60 years, 336 (63.2%) male, and 222 (41.7%) invasively ventilated). Forty-eight patients (9.0%) received an enteral pharmacological sleep aid, of which melatonin (28, 5.2%) was most frequently used. Patients not invasively ventilated were observed to be awake overnight for a median of 4.0 h (interquartile range (IQR): 2.5, 5.5), with no difference in those receiving an enteral hypnotic (p = 0.9). Non-pharmacological sleep aids were reportedly not offered or available for 52% (earplugs) and 63% of patients (eye masks). Only 7 (17.5%) participating ICUs had a policy informing sleep-optimising interventions.
Patients not receiving invasive ventilation appeared to spend many nocturnal hours awake. Pharmacological sleep aid administration was not associated with a greater observed time asleep. Most patients did not receive any non-pharmacological aid, and most ICUs did not have a local guideline or unit policy on sleep promotion.
重症患者睡眠受到干扰。催眠药物可能改善睡眠;然而,需要有关夜间清醒时间及此类药物使用情况的当地流行病学数据。
现况研究。
澳大利亚和新西兰的成人重症监护病房。
研究当天入住参与研究的重症监护病房(ICU)的所有成年患者。
通过护士的结构化观察确定夜间(22:00至06:00)的清醒时间。记录入住ICU之前及期间肠内给予镇静催眠药物的使用情况,以及单位政策和非药物促眠策略的使用情况。
有40个ICU的532例患者的数据(中位年龄60岁,男性336例(63.2%),有创通气222例(41.7%))。48例患者(9.0%)接受了肠内药物助眠,其中褪黑素(28例,5.2%)使用最为频繁。未接受有创通气的患者夜间清醒时间中位数为4.0小时(四分位间距(IQR):2.5,5.5),接受肠内催眠药物的患者无差异(p = 0.9)。据报告,52%的患者(耳塞)和63%的患者(眼罩)未提供或没有非药物助眠措施。只有7个(17.5%)参与研究的ICU有告知优化睡眠干预措施的政策。
未接受有创通气的患者夜间似乎有许多时间处于清醒状态。给予药物助眠与观察到的睡眠时间增加无关。大多数患者未接受任何非药物助眠措施,且大多数ICU没有关于促进睡眠的当地指南或科室政策。