Dataset Information

Effects of Sedatives on Sleep Architecture Measured With Odds Ratio Product in Critically Ill Patients.

ABSTRACT: Evaluation of sleep quality in critically ill patients is difficult using conventional scoring criteria. The aim of this study was to examine sleep in critically ill patients with and without light sedation using the odds ratio product, a validated continuous metric of sleep depth (0 = deep sleep; 2.5 = full wakefulness) that does not rely on the features needed for conventional staging.

Design

Retrospective study.

Settings

A 16-bed medical-surgical ICU.

Patients

Twenty-three mechanically ventilated patients who had previously undergone two nocturnal sleep studies, one without and one with sedation (propofol, n = 12; dexmedetomidine, n = 11).

Interventions

None.

Measurements and main results

Sleep architecture was evaluated with odds ratio product analysis by the distribution of 30-second epochs with different odds ratio product values. Electroencephalogram spectral patterns and frequency of wake intrusions (3-s odds ratio product > 1.75) were measured at different odds ratio product levels. Thirty-seven normal sleepers were used as controls. Compared with normal sleepers, unsedated critically ill patients spent little time in stable sleep (percent odds ratio product < 1.0: 31% vs 63%; p < 0.001), whereas most of the time were either in stage wake (odds ratio product > 1.75) or in a transitional state (odds ratio product 1.0-1.75), characterized by frequent wake intrusions. Propofol and dexmedetomidine had comparable effects on sleep. Sedation resulted in significant shift in odds ratio product distribution toward normal; percent odds ratio product less than 1.0 increased by 54% (p = 0.006), and percent odds ratio product greater than 1.75 decreased by 48% (p = 0.013). In six patients (26%), sedation failed to improve sleep.

Conclusions

In stable critically ill unsedated patients, sleep quality is poor with frequent wake intrusions and little stable sleep. Light sedation with propofol or dexmedetomidine resulted in a shift in sleep architecture toward normal in most, but not all, patients.

SUBMITTER: Georgopoulos D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8357257 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn critically ill patients, poor patient-ventilator interaction may worsen outcomes. Although sedatives are often administered to improve comfort and facilitate ventilation, they can be deleterious. Whether opioids improve asynchronies with fewer negative effects is unknown. We hypothesized that opioids alone would improve asynchronies and result in more wakeful patients than sedatives alone or sedatives-plus-opioids.MethodsThis prospective multicenter observational trial enrolled critically ill adults mechanically ventilated (MV) > 24 h. We compared asynchronies and sedation depth in patients receiving sedatives, opioids, or both. We recorded sedation level and doses of sedatives and opioids. BetterCare™ software continuously registered ineffective inspiratory efforts during expiration (IEE), double cycling (DC), and asynchrony index (AI) as well as MV modes. All variables were averaged per day. We used linear mixed-effects models to analyze the relationships between asynchronies, sedation level, and sedative and opioid doses.ResultsIn 79 patients, 14,166,469 breaths were recorded during 579 days of MV. Overall asynchronies were not significantly different in days classified as sedatives-only, opioids-only, and sedatives-plus-opioids and were more prevalent in days classified as no-drugs than in those classified as sedatives-plus-opioids, irrespective of the ventilatory mode. Sedative doses were associated with sedation level and with reduced DC (p < 0.0001) in sedatives-only days. However, on days classified as sedatives-plus-opioids, higher sedative doses and deeper sedation had more IEE (p < 0.0001) and higher AI (p = 0.0004). Opioid dosing was inversely associated with overall asynchronies (p < 0.001) without worsening sedation levels into morbid ranges.ConclusionsSedatives, whether alone or combined with opioids, do not result in better patient-ventilator interaction than opioids alone, in any ventilatory mode. Higher opioid dose (alone or with sedatives) was associated with lower AI without depressing consciousness. Higher sedative doses administered alone were associated only with less DC.Trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03451461.

Project description:Sleep is a biological mandate with an integral role in optimizing functions that maintain psychological and physical health. During critical illness, however, sleep may be disrupted at best and elusive at worst. Sleep improvement efforts and research endeavors evaluating interventions to improve sleep in critically ill adults are hampered by limited methods available to measure sleep in this setting. This narrative review summarizes available modalities for sleep assessment in the ICU, describes new ICU sleep assessment methods under development, and highlights features of the ideal ICU sleep measurement tool.Data sourcesThe most relevant literature and author experiences were assessed for inclusion from PubMed and textbooks.Study selectionThe authors selected studies for inclusion by consensus.Data extractionThe authors reviewed each study and selected appropriate data for inclusion by consensus.Data synthesisCurrently available tools to measure sleep in critically ill adults have important flaws. Subjective measurements are limited by recall bias, the inability of many patients to communicate, and poorly correlate with objective measures when completed by surrogates. Actigraphy does not consider the effects of sedating medications or myopathy leading to an over estimation of sleep time. Polysomnography, the gold standard for sleep assessment, is limited by interpretation issues and practical application concerns. Single and multiple channel electroencephalogram devices offer real-time physiologic data and are more practical to use than polysomnography but are limited by the scope of sleep-specific information they can measure and poorly characterize the circadian system.ConclusionsA measurement tool that offers real-time sleep and circadian assessment and is practical for broad application in the ICU does not exist. Newer sleep assessment devices have shown promise in measuring physiologic data in real time; when used in combination with other assessment modalities, and analyzed by computational techniques, they may revolutionize sleep monitoring in the ICU.

Project description:Background: Systemic inflammation is a whole body reaction that can have an infection-positive (i.e. sepsis) or infection-negative origin. It is important to distinguish between septic and non-septic presentations early and reliably, because this has significant therapeutic implications for critically ill patients. We hypothesized that a molecular classifier based on a small number of RNAs expressed in peripheral blood could be discovered that would: 1) determine which patients with systemic inflammation had sepsis; 2) be robust across independent patient cohorts; 3) be insensitive to disease severity; and 4) provide diagnostic utility. The overall goal of this study was to identify and validate such a molecular classifier. Methods and Findings: We conducted an observational, non-interventional study of adult patients recruited from tertiary intensive care units (ICU). Biomarker discovery was conducted with an Australian cohort (n = 105) consisting of sepsis patients and post -surgical patients with infection-negative systemic inflammation. Using this cohort, a four-gene classifier consisting of a combination of CEACAM4, LAMP1, PLA2G7 and PLAC8 RNA biomarkers was identified. This classifier, designated SeptiCyteÂ® Lab, was externally validated using RT-qPCR and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis in five cohorts (n = 345) from the Netherlands. Cohort 1 (n=59) consisted of unambiguous septic cases and infection-negative systemic inflammation controls; SeptiCyteÂ® Lab gave an area under curve (AUC) of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-1.00). ROC analysis of a more heterogeneous group of patients (Cohorts 2-5; 249 patients after excluding 37 patients with infection likelihood possible) gave an AUC of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93). Disease severity, as measured by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score or the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV score, was not a significant confounding variable. The diagnostic utility o f SeptiCyteÂ® Lab was evaluated by comparison to various clinical and laboratory parameters that would be available to a clinician within 24 hours of ICU admission. SeptiCyteÂ® Lab was significantly better at differentiating sepsis from infection-negative systemic inflammation than all tested parameters, both singly and in various logistic combinations. SeptiCyteÂ® Lab more than halved the diagnostic error rate compared to PCT in all tested cohorts or cohort combinations. Conclusions: SeptiCyteÂ® Lab is a rapid molecular assay that may be clinically useful in the management of ICU patients with systemic inflammation. SIRS and Sepsis ICU patients, admission samples Retrospective, mutli-site sutdy using retrospective physician adjudication as a comparator

Project description:BackgroundCentral venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2) is often used to help to guide resuscitation of critically ill patients. The standard gold technique for ScvO2 measurement is the co-oximetry (Co-oximetry_ScvO2), which is usually incorporated in most recent blood gas analyzers. However, in some hospitals, those machines are not available and only calculated ScvO2 (Calc_ScvO2) is provided. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the agreement between Co-oximetry_ScvO2 and Calc_ScvO2 in a general population of critically ill patients and septic shock patients.MethodsA total of 100 patients with a central venous catheter were included in the study. One hundred central venous blood samples were collected and analyzed using the same point-of-care blood gas analyzer, which provides both the calculated and measured ScvO2 values. Bland and Altman plot, intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), and Cohen's Kappa coefficient were used to assess the agreement between Co-oximetry_ScvO2 and Calc_ScvO2. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to investigate the independent explanatory variables of the difference between Co-oximetry_ScvO2 and Calc_ScvO2.ResultsIn all population, Bland and Altman's analysis showed poor agreement (+4.5 [-7.1, +16.1]%) between the two techniques. The ICC was 0.754 [(95% CI: 0.393-0.880), P< 0.001], and the Cohen's Kappa coefficient, after categorizing the two variables into two groups using a cutoff value of 70%, was 0.470 (P <0.001). In septic shock patients (49%), Bland and Altman's analysis also showed poor agreement (+5.6 [-6.7 to 17.8]%). The ICC was 0.720 [95% CI: 0.222-0.881], and the Cohen's Kappa coefficient was 0.501 (P <0.001). Four independent variables (PcvO2, Co-oximetry_ScvO2, venous pH, and Hb) were found to be associated with the difference between the measured and calculated ScvO2 (adjusted R2 = 0.8, P<0.001), with PcvO2 being the main independent explanatory variable because of its highest absolute standardized coefficient. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUC) of PcvO2 to predict Co-oximetry_ScvO2 ? 70% was 0.911 [95% CI: 0.837-0.959], in all patients, and 0.903 [95% CI: 0.784-0.969], in septic shock patients. The best cutoff value was ? 36 mmHg (sensitivity, 88%; specificity, 83%), in all patients, and ? 35 mmHg (sensitivity, 94%; specificity, 71%) in septic shock patients.ConclusionsThe discrepancy between the measured and calculated ScvO2 is clinically not acceptable. We do not recommend the use of calculated ScvO2 to guide resuscitation in critically ill patients. In situations where the Co-oximetry technique is not available, relying on PcvO2 to predict the measured ScvO2 value above or below 70% could be an option.