Dataset Information

Long-Term Outcomes after Protocolized Sedation versus Usual Care in Ventilated Pediatric Patients.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale

Whether a nurse-implemented goal-directed sedation protocol resulting in more awake yet calm intubated children affects postdischarge functional status, health-related quality of life, or risk for post-traumatic stress disorder is unknown.

Objectives

To compare postdischarge outcomes in children with acute respiratory failure cluster-randomized to a sedation protocol or usual care.

Methods

A stratified random sample of 1,360 patients from 31 centers in the RESTORE (Randomized Evaluation of Sedation Titration for Respiratory Failure) trial was assessed by mail, electronically, and/or telephone 6 months after ICU discharge. In treatment group comparisons, we controlled for age, baseline functional status, and severity of illness.

Measurements and main results

We used the Pediatric Overall Performance Category and the Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category to characterize functional status, the Infant and Toddler Quality of Life Questionnaire (97-item full-length version) (<2 yr old) or Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (≥2 yr old), and the Child Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Symptom Scale (≥8 yr old and developmentally able). Functional status worsened from baseline to follow-up in 20%. Decline in functional status did not differ by treatment arm and was more common among those with baseline impairment than those with baseline normal function (27 vs. 18%; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in health-related quality of life total scores by treatment arm. Scores indicating risk of post-traumatic stress disorder occurred in 30%, with no difference between treatment arms.

Conclusions

A sedation strategy that allows patients to be more awake and exposes them to fewer sedative and analgesic medications produces no long-term harm. However, postdischarge morbidity after acute respiratory failure is common. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00814099).

SUBMITTER: Watson RS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6005554 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Protocolized sedation improves clinical outcomes in critically ill adults, but its effect in children is unknown.To determine whether critically ill children managed with a nurse-implemented, goal-directed sedation protocol experience fewer days of mechanical ventilation than patients receiving usual care.Cluster randomized trial conducted in 31 US pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). A total of 2449 children (mean age, 4.7 years; range, 2 weeks to 17 years) mechanically ventilated for acute respiratory failure were enrolled in 2009-2013 and followed up until 72 hours after opioids were discontinued, 28 days, or hospital discharge.Intervention PICUs (17 sites; n = 1225 patients) used a protocol that included targeted sedation, arousal assessments, extubation readiness testing, sedation adjustment every 8 hours, and sedation weaning. Control PICUs (14 sites; n = 1224 patients) managed sedation per usual care.The primary outcome was duration of mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes included time to recovery from acute respiratory failure, duration of weaning from mechanical ventilation, neurological testing, PICU and hospital lengths of stay, in-hospital mortality, sedation-related adverse events, measures of sedative exposure (wakefulness, pain, and agitation), and occurrence of iatrogenic withdrawal.Duration of mechanical ventilation was not different between the 2 groups (intervention: median, 6.5 [IQR, 4.1-11.2] days; control: median, 6.5 [IQR, 3.7-12.1] days). Sedation-related adverse events including inadequate pain and sedation management, clinically significant iatrogenic withdrawal, and unplanned endotracheal tube/invasive line removal were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Intervention patients experienced more postextubation stridor (7% vs 4%; P =?.03) and fewer stage 2 or worse immobility-related pressure ulcers (<1% vs 2%; P =?.001). In exploratory analyses, intervention patients had fewer days of opioid administration (median, 9 [IQR, 5-15] days vs 10 [IQR, 4-21] days; P =?.01), were exposed to fewer sedative classes (median, 2 [IQR, 2-3] classes vs 3 [IQR, 2-4] classes; P <?.001), and were more often awake and calm while intubated (median, 86% [IQR, 67%-100%] of days vs 75% [IQR, 50%-100%] of days; P =?.004) than control patients, respectively; however, intervention patients had more days with any report of a pain score ? 4 (median, 50% [IQR, 27%-67%] of days vs 23% [IQR, 0%-46%] of days; P <?.001) and any report of agitation (median, 60% [IQR, 33%-80%] vs 40% [IQR, 13%-67%]; P =?.003), respectively.Among children undergoing mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure, the use of a sedation protocol compared with usual care did not reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation. Exploratory analyses of secondary outcomes suggest a complex relationship among wakefulness, pain, and agitation.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00814099.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:s: Few feasibility, safety, and efficacy data exist regarding ICU-based rehabilitative services for children. We hypothesized that early protocolized assessment and therapy would be feasible and safe versus usual care in pediatric neurocritical care patients. DESIGN:Randomized controlled trial. SETTING:Three tertiary care PICUs in the United States. PATIENTS:Fifty-eight children between the ages of 3-17 years with new traumatic or nontraumatic brain insult and expected ICU admission greater than 48 hours. INTERVENTIONS:Early protocolized (consultation of physical therapy, occupational therapy, and speech and language therapy within 72 hr ICU admission, n = 26) or usual care (consultation per treating team, n = 32). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Primary outcomes were consultation timing, treatment type, and frequency of deferrals and safety events. Secondary outcomes included patient and family functional and quality of life outcomes at 6 months. Comparing early protocolized (n = 26) and usual care groups (n = 32), physical therapy was consulted during the hospital admission in 26 of 26 versus 28 of 32 subjects (p = 0.062) on day 2.4 ± 0.8 versus 7.7 ± 4.8 (p = 0.001); occupational therapy in 26 of 26 versus 23 of 32 (p = 0.003), on day 2.3 ± 0.6 versus 6.9 ± 4.8 (p = 0.001); and speech and language therapy in 26 of 26 versus 17 of 32 (p = 0.011) on day 2.3 ± 0.7 versus 13.0 ± 10.8 (p = 0.026). More children in the early protocolized group had consults and treatments occur in the ICU versus ward for all three services (all p < 0.001). Eleven sessions were discontinued early: nine during physical therapy and two during occupational therapy, none impacting patient outcome. There were no group differences in functional or quality of life outcomes. CONCLUSIONS:A protocol for early personalized rehabilitation by physical therapy, occupational therapy, and speech and language therapy in pediatric neurocritical care patients could be safely implemented and led to more ICU-based treatment sessions, accelerating the temporal profile and changing composition of interventions versus usual care, but not altering the total dose of rehabilitation.

Project description:AimsThe prolonged use of benzodiazepines and opioids can lead to an increase in the incidence of withdrawal syndrome. One of the known risk factors is the lack of a sedative-weaning protocol. This study established a sedative-weaning protocol and compared this protocol with the usual care of weaning in high-risk critically ill children.Materials and methodsThis was an open-label, randomized controlled trial in a tertiary-care hospital. We recruited children aged 1 month to 18 years who had received intravenous sedative or analgesic drugs for at least 5 days. The exclusion criteria were patients who had already experienced the withdrawal syndrome. We established a weaning protocol. Eligible patients were randomly divided into the protocolized (intervention) and usual care (control) groups. The primary objective was to determine the prevalence of the withdrawal syndrome compared between two groups.ResultsThirty eligible patients were enrolled (19 in the intervention and 11 in the control group). Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between both the groups. The prevalence of the withdrawal syndrome was 84% and 81% of patients in the intervention and control group, respectively. The duration of the initial weaning phase was shorter in the intervention group than in the control group (p value = 0.026). The cumulative dose of morphine solution for rescue therapy in the intervention group was statistically lower than that in the control group (p value = 0.016).ConclusionThe implementation of the sedative-weaning protocol led to a significant reduction in the percentage of withdrawal days and length of intensive care unit stay without any adverse drug reactions. External validation would be needed to validate this protocol.Clinicaltrialsgov identifierNCT03018977.How to cite this articleTiacharoen D, Lertbunrian R, Veawpanich J, Suppalarkbunlue N, Anantasit N. Protocolized Sedative Weaning vs Usual Care in Pediatric Critically Ill Patients: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(6):451-458.

Project description:Background: Protocolized ventilator weaning (PW) strategies utilizing spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) result in shorter intubation duration and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS). We compared respiratory therapy (RT)-driven PW versus usual care (UC) as it pertains to physiologic respiratory parameters, intubation duration, extubation success/reintubation rates, and ICU LOS. Methods: prospective, multicentric, randomized controlled trial was performed in closed medical and surgical ICUs with 24/7 in-house intensivist coverage at six academic medical centers in a resource-limited setting from October 18, 2007, to May 03, 2014. Extubation readiness was determined by the attending physician (UC) or the respiratory therapist (PW) using predefined criteria and SBT. Physiologic variables, serial blood gas measurements, and weaning indices were assessed including the Rapid Shallow Breathing Index (RSBI), negative inspiratory force (NIF), occlusion pressure (P0.1), and dynamic and static compliance (Cdyn and Cs). Results: total of 5502 patients were randomized (PW 2787; UC 2715), of which 167 patients died without ventilator weaning (PW 90; UC 77) and 645 patients were excluded (PW 365; UC 280). Finally, a total of 4200 patients were analyzed (PW 2075; UC 2125). The PW group displayed improvements in minute ventilation (P < 0.001), Cs and Cdyn(both P < 0.05), P0.1 (P < 0.001), NIF (P < 0.001), and RSBI (P < 0.001). Early re-intubation (≤48 h) rates were lower in the PW group (16.7% vs. 24.8%; P < 0.0001), as were late re-intubation rates (5.2% vs. 25.8%; P < 0.0001). Intubation duration was longer in the PW group (P < 0.001), however, hospital LOS was shorter (P < 0.001). Mortality was unchanged (P = 0.19). Conclusion: PW with RT-driven extubation decisions is safe, effective, and associated with decreased re-intubation (early and late), shorter hospital stays, increased intubation duration (statistically but not clinically significant), and unchanged in-patient mortality.

Project description:Objective: Compare the duration of mechanical ventilation between patients receiving sedation with continuous infusions of propofol alone or combination with the use of dexmedetomidine and propofol. Design: Retrospective, propensity matched (1:1) cohort study, employing eight variables chosen a priori for matching. Timing of exposure to dexmedetomidine initiation was incorporated into a matching algorithm. Setting: Level 1, university-based, 32-bed, adult, mixed trauma and surgical intensive care unit (SICU). Continuous sedation was delivered according to a protocol methodology with daily sedation vacation and spontaneous breathing trials. Choice of sedation agent was physician directed. Patients: Between 2010 and 2014, 149 SICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation for >24 h received dexmedetomidine with propofol. Propensity matching resulted in 143 pair cohorts. Interventions: Dexmedetomidine with propofol or propofol alone. Measurements and Main Results: There was no statistical difference in SICU length of stay (LOS), with a median absolute difference of 5.3 h for propofol alone group (p = 0.43). The SICU mortality was not statistically different (RR = 1.002, p = 0.88). Examining a 14-day period post-treatment with dexmedetomidine, on any given day (excluding days 1 and 14), dexmedetomidine with propofol-treated patients had a 0.5% to 22.5% greater likelihood of being delirious (CAM-ICU positive). In addition, dexmedetomidine with propofol-treated patients had a 4.5% to 18.8% higher likelihood of being above the target sedation score (more agitated) compared to propofol-alone patients. Conclusions: In this propensity matched cohort study, adjunct use of dexmedetomidine to propofol did not show a statistically significant reduction with respect to mechanical ventilation (MV) duration, SICU LOS, or SICU mortality, despite a trend toward receiving fewer hours of propofol. There was no evidence that dexmedetomidine with propofol improved sedation scores or reduced delirium.

Project description:RATIONALE:There remains significant controversy regarding the optimal approach to fluid resuscitation for patients in shock. The magnitude of care variability in shock resuscitation, the confounding effects of disease severity and comorbidity, and the relative impact on sepsis survival are poorly understood. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate usual care variability and determine the differential effect of observed and predicted fluid resuscitation volumes on risk-adjusted hospital mortality for mechanically ventilated patients in shock. METHODS:We performed a retrospective outcome analysis of mechanically ventilated patients admitted to intensive care units using the 2013 Premier Hospital Database (Premier, Inc.). Observed and predicted hospital mortality were evaluated by observed and predicted day 1 fluid administration, using the difference in predicted and observed outcomes to adjust for disease severity between groups. Both predictive models were validated using a second large administrative database (Truven Health Analytics Inc.). Secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, hospital and ICU length of stay, and cost. RESULTS:Among 33,831 patients, observed hospital mortality was incrementally higher than predicted for each additional liter of day 1 fluid beginning at 7 L (40.9% vs. 37.2%, p?=?0.008). Compared to patients that received expected (±?1.5?L predicted) day 1 fluid volumes, greater-than-expected fluid resuscitation was associated with increased risk-adjusted hospital mortality (52.3% vs. 45.0%, p?<?0.0001) among all patients with shock and among a subgroup of shock patients with comorbid conditions predictive of lower fluid volume administration (47.1% vs. 41.5%, p?<?0.0001). However, in patients with shock but without such conditions, both greater-than-expected (57.5% vs. 49.2%, p <?0.0001) and less-than-expected (52.1% vs. 49.2%, p?=?0.037) day 1 fluid resuscitation were associated with increased risk-adjusted hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS:Highly variable day 1 fluid resuscitation was associated with a non-uniform impact on risk-adjusted hospital mortality among distinct subgroups of mechanically ventilated patients with shock. These findings support closer evaluation of fluid resuscitation strategies that include broadly applied fluid volume targets in the early phase of shock resuscitation.