Suppr超能文献

持续静脉镇静的使用与机械通气时间延长有关。

The use of continuous i.v. sedation is associated with prolongation of mechanical ventilation.

作者信息

Kollef M H, Levy N T, Ahrens T S, Schaiff R, Prentice D, Sherman G

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.

出版信息

Chest. 1998 Aug;114(2):541-8. doi: 10.1378/chest.114.2.541.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the use of continuous i.v. sedation is associated with prolongation of the duration of mechanical ventilation.

DESIGN

Prospective observational cohort study.

SETTING

The medical ICU of Barnes-Jewish Hospital, a university-affiliated urban teaching hospital.

PATIENTS

Two hundred forty-two consecutive ICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation.

INTERVENTIONS

Patient surveillance and data collection.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

The primary outcome measure was the duration of mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcome measures included ICU and hospital lengths of stay, hospital mortality, and acquired organ system derangements. A total of 93 (38.4%) mechanically ventilated patients received continuous i.v. sedation while 149 (61.6%) patients received either bolus administration of i.v. sedation (n=64) or no i.v. sedation (n=85) following intubation. The duration of mechanical ventilation was significantly longer for patients receiving continuous i.v. sedation compared with patients not receiving continuous i.v. sedation (185+/-190 h vs 55.6+/-75.6 h; p<0.001). Similarly, the lengths of intensive care (13.5+/-33.7 days vs 4.8+/-4.1 days; p<0.001) and hospitalization (21.0+/-25.1 days vs 12.8+/-14.1 days; p<0.001) were statistically longer among patients receiving continuous i.v. sedation. Multiple linear regression analysis, adjusting for age, gender, severity of illness, mortality, indication for mechanical ventilation, use of chemical paralysis, presence of a tracheostomy, and the number of acquired organ system derangements, found the adjusted duration of mechanical ventilation to be significantly longer for patients receiving continuous i.v. sedation compared with patients who did not receive continuous i.v. sedation (148 h [95% confidence interval: 121, 175 h] vs 78.7 h [95% confidence interval: 68.9, 88.6 h]; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

We conclude from these preliminary observational data that the use of continuous i.v. sedation may be associated with the prolongation of mechanical ventilation. This study suggests that strategies targeted at reducing the use of continuous i.v. sedation could shorten the duration of mechanical ventilation for some patients. Prospective randomized clinical trials, using well-designed sedation guidelines and protocols, are required to determine whether patient-specific outcomes (eg, duration of mechanical ventilation, patient comfort) can be improved compared with conventional sedation practices.

摘要

研究目的

确定持续静脉镇静的使用是否与机械通气时间延长相关。

设计

前瞻性观察性队列研究。

地点

巴恩斯-犹太医院的医学重症监护病房,一家大学附属的城市教学医院。

患者

242例连续入住重症监护病房且需要机械通气的患者。

干预措施

患者监测和数据收集。

测量指标及结果

主要结局指标为机械通气时间。次要结局指标包括重症监护病房住院时间和医院住院时间、医院死亡率以及获得性器官系统功能紊乱。共有93例(38.4%)接受机械通气的患者接受了持续静脉镇静,而149例(61.6%)患者在插管后接受了静脉推注镇静(n = 64)或未接受静脉镇静(n = 85)。与未接受持续静脉镇静的患者相比,接受持续静脉镇静的患者机械通气时间显著更长(185±190小时 vs 55.6±75.6小时;p<0.001)。同样,接受持续静脉镇静的患者重症监护时间(13.5±33.7天 vs 4.8±4.1天;p<0.001)和住院时间(21.0±25.1天 vs 12.8±14.1天;p<0.001)在统计学上也更长。多因素线性回归分析在对年龄、性别、疾病严重程度、死亡率、机械通气指征、使用化学麻痹、是否存在气管造口术以及获得性器官系统功能紊乱的数量进行校正后,发现与未接受持续静脉镇静的患者相比,接受持续静脉镇静的患者校正后的机械通气时间显著更长(148小时[95%置信区间:121, 175小时] vs 78.7小时[95%置信区间:68.9, 88.6小时];p<0.001)。

结论

我们从这些初步观察数据中得出结论,持续静脉镇静的使用可能与机械通气时间延长相关。本研究表明,针对减少持续静脉镇静使用的策略可能会缩短部分患者的机械通气时间。需要进行前瞻性随机临床试验,采用精心设计的镇静指南和方案,以确定与传统镇静方法相比,是否能改善患者特异性结局(如机械通气时间、患者舒适度)。

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