The LiberAction Project: Implementation of a Pediatric Liberation Bundle to Screen Delirium, Reduce Benzodiazepine Sedation, and Provide Early Mobilization in a Human Resource-Limited Pediatric Intensive Care Unit.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Di Nardo M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8692861 | biostudies-literature | 2021
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
The LiberAction Project: Implementation of a Pediatric Liberation Bundle to Screen Delirium, Reduce Benzodiazepine Sedation, and Provide Early Mobilization in a Human Resource-Limited Pediatric Intensive Care Unit.
Di Nardo Matteo M Boldrini Francesca F Broccati Francesca F Cancani Federica F Satta Tiziana T Stoppa Francesca F Genuini Leonardo L Zampini Giorgio G Perdichizzi Salvatore S Bottari Gabriella G Fischer Maximilian M Gawronski Orsola O Bonetti Annamaria A Piermarini Irene I Recchiuti Veronica V Leone Paola P Rossi Angela A Tabarini Paola P Biasucci Daniele D Villani Alberto A Raponi Massimiliano M Cecchetti Corrado C Choong Karen K
Frontiers in pediatrics 20211208
<b>Background:</b> Delirium, bed immobilization, and heavy sedation are among the major contributors of pediatric post-intensive care syndrome. Recently, the Society of Critical Care Medicine has proposed the implementation of daily interventions to minimize the incidence of these morbidities and optimize children functional outcomes and quality of life. Unfortunately, these interventions require important clinical and economical efforts which prevent their use in many pediatric intensive care u ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCommon, operational definitions are crucial to assess interventions and outcomes related to pediatric mechanical ventilation. These definitions can reduce unnecessary variability among research and quality improvement efforts, to ensure findings are generalizable, and can be pooled to establish best practices.Research questionCan we establish operational definitions for key elements related to pediatric ventilator liberation using a combination of detailed literature review and consensus-based approaches?Study design and methodsA panel of 26 international experts in pediatric ventilator liberation, two methodologists, and two librarians conducted systematic reviews on eight topic areas related to pediatric ventilator liberation. Through a series of virtual meetings, we established draft definitions that were voted upon using an anonymous web-based process. Definitions were revised by incorporating extracted data gathered during the systematic review and discussed in another consensus meeting. A second round of voting was conducted to confirm the final definitions.ResultsIn eight topic areas identified by the experts, 16 preliminary definitions were established. Based on initial discussion and the first round of voting, modifications were suggested for 11 of the 16 definitions. There was significant variability in how these items were defined in the literature reviewed. The final round of voting achieved ≥ 80% agreement for all 16 definitions in the following areas: what constitutes respiratory support (invasive mechanical ventilation and noninvasive respiratory support), liberation and failed attempts to liberate from invasive mechanical ventilation, liberation from respiratory support, duration of noninvasive respiratory support, total duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, spontaneous breathing trials, extubation readiness testing, 28 ventilator-free days, and planned vs rescue use of post-extubation noninvasive respiratory support.InterpretationWe propose that these consensus-based definitions for elements of pediatric ventilator liberation, informed by evidence, be used for future quality improvement initiatives and research studies to improve generalizability and facilitate comparison.
| S-EPMC10206507 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo measure the impact of staged implementation of full versus partial ABCDE bundle on mechanical ventilation duration, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, and cost.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingTwo medical ICUs within Montefiore Healthcare Center (Bronx, NY).PatientsOne thousand eight hundred fifty-five mechanically ventilated patients admitted to ICUs between July 2011 and July 2014.InterventionsAt baseline, spontaneous (B)reathing trials (B) were ongoing in both ICUs; in period 1, (A)wakening and (D)elirium (AD) were implemented in both full and partial bundle ICUs; in period 2, (E)arly mobilization and structured bundle (C)oordination (EC) were implemented in the full bundle (B-AD-EC) but not the partial bundle ICU (B-AD).Measurements and main resultsIn the full bundle ICU, 95% patient days were spent in bed before EC (period 1). After EC was implemented (period 2), 65% of patients stood, 54% walked at least once during their ICU stay, and ICU-acquired pressure ulcers and physical restraint use decreased (period 1 vs 2: 39% vs 23% of patients; 30% vs 26% patient days, respectively; p < 0.001 for both). After adjustment for patient-level covariates, implementation of the full (B-AD-EC) versus partial (B-AD) bundle was associated with reduced mechanical ventilation duration (-22.3%; 95% CI, -22.5% to -22.0%; p < 0.001), ICU length of stay (-10.3%; 95% CI, -15.6% to -4.7%; p = 0.028), and hospital length of stay (-7.8%; 95% CI, -8.7% to -6.9%; p = 0.006). Total ICU and hospital cost were also reduced by 24.2% (95% CI, -41.4% to -2.0%; p = 0.03) and 30.2% (95% CI, -46.1% to -9.5%; p = 0.007), respectively.ConclusionsIn a clinical practice setting, the addition of (E)arly mobilization and structured (C)oordination of ABCDE bundle components to a spontaneous (B)reathing, (A)wakening, and (D) elirium management background led to substantial reductions in the duration of mechanical ventilation, length of stay, and cost.
| S-EPMC6579661 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aims Choice of sedation (propofol vs opioid/benzodiazepine) has been studied in the literature and has shown variable outcomes. The majority of recent studies have evaluated propofol sedation (PS) versus opioids, benzodiazepines, or a combination of both. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing PS to other sedation methods to assess the impact on colonoscopy outcomes. Methods Multiple databases were searched and studies of interest were extracted. Primary outcome of the study was adenoma detection rate (ADR) and secondary outcomes included polyp detection rate (PDR), advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR), and cecal intubation rate (CIR). Results A total of 11 studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 177,016 patients (148,753 and 28,263 in the opioids/benzodiazepine group and PS group, respectively). Overall, ADR (RR: 1.07, 95 % CI 0.99-1.15), PDR (RR: 1.01, 95 % CI 0.93-1.10), and AADR (RR: 1.17, 95 % CI 0.92-1.48) did not improve with the use of PS. The CIR was slightly higher for propofol sedation group (RR 1.02, 95 % CI 1.00-1.03). Conclusion Based on our analysis, PS and opioid/benzodiazepine sedation seem to have comparable ADR. Our results do not favor use of a particular sedation method and the choice of sedation should be individualized based on patient preference, risk factors and resource availability.
| S-EPMC7247890 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The role of genomics in postoperative delirium and sedation
| PRJNA671358 | ENA
Project description:Pediatric ventilation liberation has limited evidence, likely resulting in wide practice variation. To inform future work, practice patterns must first be described. Describe international pediatric ventilation liberation practices and regional practice variation. International cross-sectional electronic survey. Nontrainee pediatric medical and cardiac critical care physicians. Practices focusing on spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) eligibility, SBT practice, non-SBT extubation readiness bundle elements, and post-extubation respiratory support. Five-hundred fifty-five responses representing 47 countries were analyzed. Most respondents reported weaning followed by an SBT (86.4%). The top SBT eligibility variables reported were positive end-expiratory pressure (95%), Fio2 (93.4%), and peak inspiratory pressure (73.9%). Most reported use of standardized pressure support regardless of endotracheal tube size (40.4%) with +10 cm H2O predominating (38.6%). SBT durations included less than or equal to 30 minutes (34.8%), 31 minutes to 1 hour (39.3%), and greater than 1 hours (26%). In assigning an SBT result, top variables were respiratory rate (94%), oxygen saturation (89.3%), and subjective work of breathing (79.8%). Most reported frequent consideration of endotracheal secretion burden (81.3%), standardized pain/sedation measurement (72.8%), fluid balance (83%), and the endotracheal air leak test as a part of extubation readiness bundles. Most reported using planned high flow nasal cannula in less than or equal to 50% of extubations (83.2%). Top subpopulations supported with planned HFNC were those with chronic lung disease (67.3%), exposed to invasive ventilation greater than 14 days (66.6%), and chronic critical illness (44.9%). Most reported using planned noninvasive ventilation (NIV) following less than or equal to 20% of extubations (79.9%). Top subpopulations supported with planned NIV were those with neuromuscular disease (72.8%), chronic lung disease (66.7%), and chronic NIV use for any reason (61.6%). Regional variation was high for most practices studied. International pediatric ventilation liberation practices are heterogeneous. Future study is needed to address key evidence gaps. Many practice differences were associated with respondent region, which must be considered in international study design.
| S-EPMC9444408 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The ICU Liberation (ABCDEF) Bundle can help to improve care and outcomes for ICU patients, but bundle implementation is far from universal. Understanding how ICU organizational characteristics influence bundle implementation could inform quality improvement efforts. We surveyed all hospitals in Michigan with adult ICUs to determine whether organizational characteristics were associated with bundle implementation and to determine the level of agreement between ICU physician and nurse leaders around ICU organizational characteristics and bundle implementation.DesignWe surveyed ICU physician and nurse leaders, assessing their safety culture, ICU team collaboration, and work environment. Using logistic and linear regression models, we compared these organizational characteristics to bundle element implementation, and also compared physician and nurse leaders' perceptions about organizational characteristics and bundle implementation.SettingAll (n = 72) acute care hospitals with adult ICUs in Michigan.SubjectsICU physician and nurse leader pairs from each hospital's main ICU.InterventionsWe developed, pilot-tested, and deployed an electronic survey to all subjects over a 3 month period in 2016.ResultsResults from 73 surveys (28 physicians, 45 nurses, 60% hospital response rate) demonstrated significant variation in hospital and ICU size and type, organizational characteristics, and physician/nurse perceptions of ICU organization and bundle implementation. We found that a robust safety culture and collaborative work environment that uses checklists to facilitate team communication are strongly associated with bundle implementation. There is also a significant dose-response effect between safety culture, a collaborative work environment, and overall bundle implementation.ConclusionsWe identified several specific ICU practices that can facilitate ABCDEF Bundle implementation. Our results can be used to develop effective bundle implementation strategies that leverage safety culture, interprofessional collaboration, and routine checklist use in ICUs to improve bundle implementation and performance.
| S-EPMC7437774 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThere is limited evidence on the optimal strategy for liberating infants and children from invasive mechanical ventilation in the pediatric intensive care unit.ObjectiveTo determine if a sedation and ventilator liberation protocol intervention reduces the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation in infants and children anticipated to require prolonged mechanical ventilation.Design, setting, and participantsA pragmatic multicenter, stepped-wedge, cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted that included 17 hospital sites (18 pediatric intensive care units) in the UK sequentially randomized from usual care to the protocol intervention. From February 2018 to October 2019, 8843 critically ill infants and children anticipated to require prolonged mechanical ventilation were recruited. The last date of follow-up was November 11, 2019.InterventionsPediatric intensive care units provided usual care (n = 4155 infants and children) or a sedation and ventilator liberation protocol intervention (n = 4688 infants and children) that consisted of assessment of sedation level, daily screening for readiness to undertake a spontaneous breathing trial, a spontaneous breathing trial to test ventilator liberation potential, and daily rounds to review sedation and readiness screening and set patient-relevant targets.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation from initiation of ventilation until the first successful extubation. The primary estimate of the treatment effect was a hazard ratio (with a 95% CI) adjusted for calendar time and cluster (hospital site) for infants and children anticipated to require prolonged mechanical ventilation.ResultsThere were a total of 8843 infants and children (median age, 8 months [interquartile range, 1 to 46 months]; 42% were female) who completed the trial. There was a significantly shorter median time to successful extubation for the protocol intervention compared with usual care (64.8 hours vs 66.2 hours, respectively; adjusted median difference, -6.1 hours [interquartile range, -8.2 to -5.3 hours]; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.02 to 1.20], P = .02). The serious adverse event of hypoxia occurred in 9 (0.2%) infants and children for the protocol intervention vs 11 (0.3%) for usual care; nonvascular device dislodgement occurred in 2 (0.04%) vs 7 (0.1%), respectively.Conclusions and relevanceAmong infants and children anticipated to require prolonged mechanical ventilation, a sedation and ventilator liberation protocol intervention compared with usual care resulted in a statistically significant reduction in time to first successful extubation. However, the clinical importance of the effect size is uncertain.Trial registrationisrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN16998143.
| S-EPMC8335576 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To determine whether benzodiazepine and propofol doses are increased at night and whether daytime and nighttime sedative doses are associated with delirium, coma, and delayed liberation from mechanical ventilation.Single-center, prospective cohort study nested within the Awakening and Breathing Controlled randomized trial.Saint Thomas Hospital in Nashville, TN, from 2004 to 2006.Adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation for >12 hrs with continuous recording of hourly sedation dosing.We measured hourly doses of benzodiazepine and propofol exposure during the daytime (7 AM to 11 PM) and nighttime (11 PM to 7 AM) for 5 days. We quantified nighttime dose increases by subtracting the average hourly daytime dose on the preceding day from subsequent average hourly nighttime dose. We used multivariable logistic regression to determine whether daytime and nighttime dose increases were independently associated with delirium, coma, and delayed liberation from mechanical ventilation.Among 140 patients, the median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score was 27 (interquartile range 22-33). Among those receiving the sedatives, benzodiazepine and propofol doses were increased at night on 40% and 41% of patient-days, respectively. Of 485 patient-days, delirium was present on 160 (33%) and coma on 206 (42%). In adjusted models, greater daytime benzodiazepine dose was independently associated with failed spontaneous breathing trial and extubation, and subsequent delirium (p<.02 for all). Nighttime increase in benzodiazepine dose was associated with failed spontaneous breathing trial (p<.01) and delirium (p=.05). Daytime propofol dose was marginally associated with subsequent delirium (p=.06).Nearly half of mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients received greater doses of sedation at night, a practice associated with failed spontaneous breathing trials, coma, and delirium. Over the first 5 days in our study, patients spent 75% of their time in coma or delirium, outcomes that may be reduced by efforts to decrease sedative exposure during both daytime and nighttime hours in the intensive care unit.
| S-EPMC3576216 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile understanding of critical illness and delirium continue to evolve, the impact on clinical practice is often unknown and delayed. Our purpose was to provide insight into practice changes by characterizing analgesia and sedation usage and occurrence of delirium in different years and international regions.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of two multicenter, international, prospective cohort studies. Mechanically ventilated adults were followed for up to 28 days in 2010 and 2016. Proportion of days utilizing sedation, analgesia, and performance of a spontaneous awakening trial (SAT), and occurrence of delirium were described for each year and region and compared between years.ResultsA total of 14,281 patients from 6 international regions were analyzed. Proportion of days utilizing analgesia and sedation increased from 2010 to 2016 (p < 0.001 for each). Benzodiazepine use decreased in every region but remained the most common sedative in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Performance of SATs increased overall, driven mostly by the US/Canada region (24 to 35% of days with sedation, p < 0.001). Any delirium during admission increased from 7 to 8% of patients overall and doubled in the US/Canada region (17 to 36%, p < 0.001).ConclusionsAnalgesia and sedation practices varied widely across international regions and significantly changed over time. Opportunities for improvement in care include increasing delirium monitoring, performing SATs, and decreasing use of sedation, particularly benzodiazepines.
| S-EPMC6480848 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSince the publication of the 2018 Clinical Guidelines about sedation, analgesia, delirium, mobilization, and sleep deprivation in critically ill patients, no evaluation and adequacy assessment of these recommendations were studied in an international context. This survey aimed to investigate these current practices and if the COVID-19 pandemic has changed them.MethodsThis study was an open multinational electronic survey directed to physicians working in adult intensive care units (ICUs), which was performed in two steps: before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsWe analyzed 1768 questionnaires and 1539 (87%) were complete. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, we received 1476 questionnaires and 292 were submitted later. The following practices were observed before the pandemic: the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (61.5%), the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) (48.2%), the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) (76.6%), and the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) (66.6%) were the most frequently tools used to assess pain, sedation level, and delirium, respectively; midazolam and fentanyl were the most frequently used drugs for inducing sedation and analgesia (84.8% and 78.3%, respectively), whereas haloperidol (68.8%) and atypical antipsychotics (69.4%) were the most prescribed drugs for delirium treatment; some physicians regularly prescribed drugs to induce sleep (19.1%) or ordered mechanical restraints as part of their routine (6.2%) for patients on mechanical ventilation; non-pharmacological strategies were frequently applied for pain, delirium, and sleep deprivation management. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the intensive care specialty was independently associated with best practices. Moreover, the mechanical ventilation rate was higher, patients received sedation more often (94% versus 86.1%, p < 0.001) and sedation goals were discussed more frequently in daily rounds. Morphine was the main drug used for analgesia (77.2%), and some sedative drugs, such as midazolam, propofol, ketamine and quetiapine, were used more frequently.ConclusionsMost sedation, analgesia and delirium practices were comparable before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, the intensive care specialty was a variable that was independently associated with the best practices. Although many findings are in accordance with evidence-based recommendations, some practices still need improvement.
| S-EPMC8815719 | biostudies-literature