Interpreting and Implementing the 2018 Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption Clinical Practice Guideline

Liberation from Mechanical Ventilation in Critically Ill Patients: Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Successful liberation from mechanical ventilation is one of the most crucial processes in critical care, because it is the first step through which a respiratory failure patient begins to transition out of the intensive care unit, and return to normal life. Therefore, when devising appropriate strategies for removing mechanical ventilation, it is essential to consider scientific and systematic approaches, as well as the individual experiences of healthcare professionals. Recently, numerous studies have investigated methods and tools to identify when mechanically ventilated patients are ready to breathe on their own. The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine therefore provides these recommendations to clinicians for liberation from the ventilator.

METHODS

Meta-analyses and comprehensive syntheses were used to thoroughly review, compile, and summarize the complete body of relevant evidence. All studies were meticulously assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and the outcomes were presented succinctly as evidence profiles. These evidence syntheses were discussed by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation, who then developed and approved the recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations for nine questions on ventilator liberation about Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) are presented in this document. This guideline presents seven conditional recommendations, one expert consensus recommendation, and one conditional deferred recommendation.

CONCLUSION

We developed these clinical guidelines for mechanical ventilation liberation to provide meaningful recommendations. These guidelines reflect the best treatment for patients seeking liberation from mechanical ventilation.

Assessing pain in paralyzed critically ill patients receiving neuromuscular blocking agents: A monocenter prospective cohort

INTRODUCTION

Given the absence of established recommendations for pain assessment in pharmacologically paralyzed Intensive-Care-Units (ICU) patients under Neuro-Muscular-Blocking Agents (NMBA), this study assessed the validity of various parameters for evaluating pain in this specific population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Four electrophysiological parameters (instant-Analgesia-Nociception-Index (ANI), Bispectral index (BIS), Heart Rate (HR) and Mean Arterial Blood Pressure (ABP)) and one clinical parameter (Behavioural-Pain-Scale (BPS)) were recorded during tracheal-suctioning in all consecutive ICU patients who required a continuous infusion of cisatracurium, before and just after paralysis recovery measured by Train-of-Four ratio. The validity of the five pain-related parameters was assessed by comparing the values recorded during different situations (before/during/after the nociceptive procedure) (discriminant-validity, primary outcome), and the effect of paralysis was assessed by comparing values obtained during and after paralysis (reliability, secondary outcome).

RESULTS

Twenty patients were analyzed. ANI, BIS, and HR significantly changed during the nociceptive procedure in both paralysis and recovery, while BPS changed only post-recovery. ANI and HR were unaffected by paralysis, unlike BIS and BPS (mixed-effect model). ANI exhibited the highest discriminant-validity, with values (min 0/max 100) decreasing from 71 [48-89] at rest to 41 [25-72] during tracheal suctioning in paralyzed patients, and from 71 [53-85] at rest to 40 [31-52] in non-paralyzed patients.

CONCLUSIONS

ANI proves the most discriminant parameter for pain detection in both paralyzed and non-paralyzed sedated ICU patients. Its significant and clinically relevant decrease during tracheal suctioning remains unaltered by NMBA use. Pending further studies on analgesia protocols based on ANI, it could be used to assess pain during nociceptive procedures in ICU patients receiving NMBA.

Efficacy of Continuous Infusion Ketamine for Analgosedation in the Medical Intensive Care Unit: A Propensity-Weighted Analysis

Background: Few randomized controlled trials have evaluated the use of ketamine vs opiate-based analgosedation. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of 169 mechanically ventilated patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) at an academic medical center was conducted to evaluate efficacy of ketamine vs opiate-based analgosedation by comparing the percentage of time within target sedation range. The primary outcome was percentage of time within target sedation range (RASS -1 to +1) within first 72 hours of primary sedation initiation. Secondary outcomes including percentage of time under-sedated, over-sedated, and in coma; use of concomitant analgesic, sedative, and antipsychotic agents; presence of delirium; percentage of CPOT scores at goal; and hemodynamic effects were also evaluated. Results: After weighting, the mean percentage of time at RASS goal for ketamine patients was 43.0% compared to 41.4% for opiate-based sedation patients. Ketamine was not significantly non-inferior to opiate-based sedation for the mean percentage of time at RASS goal (P = .11). The median percentage of CPOT scores at goal was 13.3% higher in the ketamine group (P = .042). Patients in the ketamine group received significantly less additional sedative agents than the patients in the opiate-based sedation group. Conclusion: A similar percent of time at RASS goal was found for the ketamine analgosedation group compared to the opiate-based sedation group, although this did not reach statistical signicance for non-inferiority due to lack of statistical power. This study found a higher percentage of CPOT scores within goal with less additional sedative agents required compared to an opiate-based sedation regimen.

Breathlessness assessment, management and impact in the intensive care unit: a rapid review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Adults in the intensive care unit (ICU) commonly experience distressing symptoms and other concerns such as pain, delirium, and breathlessness. Breathlessness management is not supported by any ICU guidelines, unlike other symptoms.

AIM

To review the literature relating to (i) prevalence, intensity, assessment, and management of breathlessness in critically ill adults in the ICU receiving invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) and high-flow oxygen therapy, (HFOT), (ii) the impact of breathlessness on ICU patients with regard to engagement with rehabilitation.

METHODS

A rapid review and narrative synthesis using the Cochrane Methods Group Recommendations was conducted and reported in accordance with PRISMA. All study designs investigating breathlessness in adult ICU patients receiving either invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), NIV or HFOT were eligible. PubMed, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library and CINAHL databased were searched from June 2013 to June 2023. Studies were quality appraised.

RESULTS

19 studies representing 2822 ICU patients were included (participants mean age 48 years to 71 years; proportion of males 43-100%). The weighted mean prevalence of breathlessness in ICU patients receiving IMV was 49% (range 34-66%). The proportion of patients receiving NIV self-reporting moderate to severe dyspnoea was 55% prior to initiation. Breathlessness assessment tools included visual analogue scale, (VAS), numerical rating scale, (NRS) and modified BORG scale, (mBORG). In patients receiving NIV the highest reported median (interquartile range [IQR]) VAS, NRS and mBORG scores were 6.2cm (0-10 cm), 5 (2-7) and 6 (2.3-7) respectively (moderate to severe breathlessness). In patients receiving either NIV or HFOT the highest reported median (IQR) VAS, NRS and mBORG scores were 3 cm (0-6 cm), 8 (5-10) and 4 (3-5) respectively.

CONCLUSION

Breathlessness in adults receiving IMV, NIV or HFOT in the ICU is prevalent and clinically important with median intensity ratings indicating the presence of moderate to severe symptoms.

Barriers to Implementing the ICU Liberation Bundle in a Single-center Pediatric and Cardiac ICUs

Objectives: The intensive care unit (ICU) Liberation "ABCDEF" Bundle improves outcomes in critically ill adults. We aimed to identify common barriers to Pediatric ICU Liberation Bundle element implementation, to describe differences in barrier perception by ICU staff role, and to describe changes in reported barriers over time. Study Design: A 91-item survey was developed based on existing literature, iteratively revised, and tested by the PICU Liberation Committee at Seattle Children's Hospital, a tertiary free-standing academic children's hospital. Voluntary surveys were administered electronically to all ICU staff twice over 4-week periods in 2017 and 2020. Survey Respondents: 119 (2017) and 163 (2020) pediatric and cardiac ICU staff, including nurses (n = 142, 50%), respiratory therapists (RTs) (n = 46, 16%), attending and fellow physicians, hospitalists, and advanced practice providers (APPs) (n = 62, 22%), physical, occupational, and speech-language pathology therapists (n = 25, 9%), and pharmacists (n = 7, 2%). Measurements and Main Results: Respondents widely agreed that increased workload (78%-100% across roles), communication (53%-84%), and lack of RT-directed ventilator weaning (68%-88%) are barriers to implementation. Other barriers differed by role. In 2020, nurses reported liability (59%) and personal injury (68%) concerns, patient severity of illness (24%), and family discomfort with ICU liberation practices (41%) more frequently than physicians and APPs (16%, 6%, 8%, and 19%, respectively; P < .01 for all). Between 2017 and 2020, some barriers changed: RTs endorsed discomfort with early mobilization less frequently (50% vs 11%, P = .028) and nurses reported concern for patient harm less frequently (51% vs 24%, P = .004). Conclusions: Implementation efforts aimed at addressing known barriers, including educating staff on the safety of early mobility, considering respiratory therapist-directed ventilator weaning, and standardizing interdisciplinary discussion of Pediatric ICU Liberation Bundle elements, will be needed to overcome barriers and improve ICU Liberation Bundle implementation.

Multicentre implementation of a quality improvement initiative to reduce delirium in adult intensive care units: An interrupted time series analysis

PURPOSE

The ABCDEF bundle may improve delirium outcomes among intensive care unit (ICU) patients, however population-based studies are lacking. In this study we evaluated effects of a quality improvement initiative based on the ABCDEF bundle in adult ICUs in Alberta, Canada.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a pre-post, registry-based clinical trial, analysed using interrupted time series methodology. Outcomes were examined via segmented linear regression using mixed effects models. The main data source was a population-based electronic health record.

RESULTS

44,405 consecutive admissions (38,400 unique patients) admitted to 15 general medical/surgical and/or neurologic adult ICUs between 2014 and 2019 were included. The proportion of delirium days per ICU increased from 30.24% to 35.31% during the pre-intervention period. After intervention implementation it decreased significantly (bimonthly decrease of 0.34%, 95%CI 0.18-0.50%, p < 0.01) from 33.48% (95%CI 29.64-37.31%) in 2017 to 28.74% (95%CI 25.22-32.26%) in 2019. The proportion of sedation days using midazolam demonstrated an immediate decrease of 7.58% (95%CI 4.00-11.16%). There were no significant changes in duration of invasive ventilation, proportion of partial coma days, ICU mortality, or potential adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

An ABCDEF delirium initiative was implemented on a population-basis within adult ICUs and was successful at reducing the prevalence of delirium.

Clinical Impact of the Implementation Strategies Used to Apply the 2013 Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium or 2018 Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, Sleep Disruption Guideline Recommendations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the effectiveness of implementation strategies for ICU execution of recommendations from the 2013 Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium (PAD) or 2018 PAD, Immobility, Sleep Disruption (PADIS) guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from January 2012 to August 2023. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020175268).

STUDY SELECTION

Articles were included if: 1) design was randomized or cohort, 2) adult population evaluated, 3) employed recommendations from greater than or equal to two PAD/PADIS domains, and 4) evaluated greater than or equal to 1 of the following outcome(s): short-term mortality, delirium occurrence, mechanical ventilation (MV) duration, or ICU length of stay (LOS).

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently reviewed articles for eligibility, number of PAD/PADIS domains, quality according to National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute assessment tools, implementation strategy use (including Assess, prevent, and manage pain; Both SAT and SBT; Choice of analgesia and sedation; Delirium: assess, prevent, and manage; Early mobility and exercise; Family engagement and empowerment [ABCDEF] bundle) by Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) category, and clinical outcomes. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Among the 25 of 243 (10.3%) full-text articles included ( n = 23,215 patients), risk of bias was high in 13 (52%). Most studies were cohort ( n = 22, 88%). A median of 5 (interquartile range [IQR] 4-7) EPOC strategies were used to implement recommendations from two (IQR 2-3) PAD/PADIS domains. Cohort and randomized studies were pooled separately. In the cohort studies, use of EPOC strategies was not associated with a change in mortality (risk ratio [RR] 1.01; 95% CI, 0.9-1.12), or delirium (RR 0.92; 95% CI, 0.82-1.03), but was associated with a reduction in MV duration (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.84 d; 95% CI, -1.25 to -0.43) and ICU LOS (WMD -0.77 d; 95% CI, -1.51 to 0.04). For randomized studies, EPOC strategy use was associated with reduced mortality and MV duration but not delirium or ICU LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Using multiple implementation strategies to adopt PAD/PADIS guideline recommendations may reduce mortality, duration of MV, and ICU LOS. Further prospective, controlled studies are needed to identify the most effective strategies to implement PAD/PADIS recommendations.

Liberation from mechanical ventilation in critically ill patients: Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Successful liberation from mechanical ventilation is one of the most crucial processes in critical care because it is the first step by which a respiratory failure patient begins to transition out of the intensive care unit and return to their own life. Therefore, when devising appropriate strategies for removing mechanical ventilation, it is essential to consider not only the individual experiences of healthcare professionals, but also scientific and systematic approaches. Recently, numerous studies have investigated methods and tools for identifying when mechanically ventilated patients are ready to breathe on their own. The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine therefore provides these recommendations to clinicians about liberation from the ventilator.

METHODS

Meta-analyses and comprehensive syntheses were used to thoroughly review, compile, and summarize the complete body of relevant evidence. All studies were meticulously assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and the outcomes were presented succinctly as evidence profiles. Those evidence syntheses were discussed by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation, who then developed and approved recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations for nine PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions about ventilator liberation are presented in this document. This guideline includes seven conditional recommendations, one expert consensus recommendation, and one conditional deferred recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed these clinical guidelines for mechanical ventilation liberation to provide meaningful recommendations. These guidelines reflect the best treatment for patients seeking liberation from mechanical ventilation.

Early processed electroencephalography for the monitoring of deeply sedated mechanically ventilated critically ill patients

BACKGROUND

Deep sedation may be indicated in the intensive care unit (ICU) for the management of acute organ failure, but leads to sedative-induced delirium. Whether processed electroencephalography (p-EEG) is useful in this setting is unclear.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre observational study of non-neurological ICU patients sedated according to a standardized guideline of deep sedation (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale [RASS] between -5 and -4) during the acute phase of respiratory and/or cardio-circulatory failure. The SedLine (Masimo Incorporated, Irvine, California) was used to monitor the Patient State Index (PSI) (ranging from 0 to 100, <25 = very deep sedation and >50 = light sedation to full awareness) during the first 72 h of care. Delirium was assessed with the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU).

RESULTS

The median duration of PSI monitoring was 43 h. Patients spent 49% in median of the total PSI monitoring duration with a PSI <25. Patients with delirium (n = 41/97, 42%) spent a higher percentage of total monitored time with PSI <25 (median 67% [19-91] vs. 47% [12.2-78.9]) in non-delirious patients (p .047). After adjusting for the cumulative dose of analgesia and sedation, increased time spent with PSI <25 was associated with higher delirium (odds ratio 1.014; 95% CI 1.001-1.027, p = .036).

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical protocol of deep sedation targeted to RASS at the acute ICU phase may be associated with prolonged EEG suppression and increased delirium. Whether PSI-targeted sedation may help reducing sedative dose and delirium deserves further clinical investigation.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Patients requiring deep sedation are at high risk of being over-sedated and developing delirium despite the application of an evidence-based sedation guideline. Development of early objective measures are essential to improve sedation management in these critically ill patients.

Clinicians' perceptions on implementation strategies used to facilitate ABCDEF bundle adoption: A multicenter survey

BACKGROUND

Intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians struggle to routinely implement the ICU Liberation bundle (ABCDEF bundle). As a result, critically ill patients experience increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Despite extensive research related to the barriers and facilitators of bundle use, little is known regarding which implementation strategies are used to facilitate its adoption and sustainability.

OBJECTIVES

To identify implementation strategies used to increase adoption of the ABCDEF bundle and how those strategies are perceived by end-users (i.e., ICU clinicians) related to their helpfulness, acceptability, feasibility, and cost.

METHODS

We conducted a national, cross-sectional survey of ICU clinicians from the 68 ICU sites that previously participated in the Society of Critical Care Medicine's ICU Liberation Collaborative. The survey was structured using the 73 Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) implementation strategies. Surveys were delivered electronically to site contacts.

RESULTS

Nineteen ICUs (28%) returned completed surveys. Sites used 63 of the 73 ERIC implementation strategies, with frequent use of strategies that may be readily available to clinicians (e.g., providing educational meetings or ongoing training), but less use of strategies that require changes to well-established organizational systems (e.g., alter incentive allowance structure). Overall, sites described the ERIC strategies used in their implementation process to be moderately helpful (mean score >3<4 on a 5-point Likert scale), somewhat acceptable and feasible (mean score >2<3), and either not-at-all or somewhat costly (mean scores >1<3).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show a potential over-reliance on accessible strategies and the possible benefit of unused ERIC strategies related to changing infrastructure and utilizing financial strategies.

Halogenated anesthetics vs intravenous hypnotics for short and long term sedation in the intensive care unit: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively assess peer-reviewed studies using volatile (VA) or intravenous (i/v) anesthetics for sedation in intensive care units (ICUs), with the hypothesis that the type of sedation may have an impact on survival and other clinically relevant outcomes.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized trials.

SETTING

ICUs.

PARTICIPANTS

Critically ill and postoperative patients.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Studies comparing VA versus i/v anesthetics used in the ICU settings were independently systematically searched. Finally, 15 studies (1520 patients of predominantly surgical profile needed VA sedation for less than 96h) were included. VA had no impact on all-cause mortality (very low quality of evidence, Odds Ratio=0.82 [0.60-1.12], p=0.20). However, VA were associated with a reduction in duration of mechanical ventilation (p=0.03) and increase in ventilator-free days (p<0.001). VA also reduced postoperative levels of cardiac troponin (24h), time to extubation (p<0.001) and awakening (p=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

In this meta-analysis, volatile sedation vs propofol caused the increase in ventilator-free days, the reduction in the duration of mechanical ventilation, time to extubation and the troponin release in medical or surgical ICU patients, while in surgical ICU patients the time to awakening was shortened.

Prolonged sedation with sevoflurane in comparison to intravenous sedation in critically ill patients - A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Volatile anesthetics are used more commonly for sedation in the intensive-care-unit (ICU). However, evidence for long-term use remains low. We therefore conducted a randomized-controlled trial comparing sevoflurane with intravenous sedation with particular focus on efficacy and safety.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized-controlled phase-IIb monocentric clinical-trial ICU patients requiring at least 48 h of sedation were randomized to receive sevoflurane (S) or propofol/midazolam (P). Sedation quality was monitored using the Richmond-Agitation-Sedation-Scale. Following termination of sedation, the time to spontaneous breathing and extubation, opioid consumption, hemodynamics, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS) and adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

79 patients were eligible to randomization. Sedation quality was comparable between sevoflurane (n = 39) and propofol (n = 40). However, the use of sevoflurane lead to a reduction in time to spontaneous breathing (26 min vs. 375 min, P < 0.001). Patients sedated with propofol had lower opioid requirements (remifentanil:400 μg/h vs. 500 μg/h, P = 0.007; sufentanil:40 μg/h vs. 30 μg/h, P = 0.007) while hemodynamics, LOS or the occurrence of adverse events did not differ.

CONCLUSION

ICU patients sedated with sevoflurane >48 h may return to spontaneous breathing faster, while the quality of sedation is comparable to a propofol-based sedation regime. Sevoflurane might be considered to be safe for long-term sedation in this patient population, while being non-inferior compared to propofol.

Post Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS) physical, cognitive, and mental health outcomes 6-months to 7 years after a major burn injury: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

The Post Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS) has been described in intensive care (ICU) survivors, being present in 50% of patients surviving 12 months, with well-defined risk factors. Severely burned patients combine many of these risk factors, but the prevalence of PICS has not yet been documented in burns. The study aimed to answer this question and identify associations of PICS with clinical characteristics.

METHODS

Cross-sectional descriptive study of major burn survivors admitted to the burn ICU between 2013 and 2019. Main inclusion criteria: major burns>20 %BSA and ICU admission. The PICS components were assessed using three questionnaires: 1) Physical with Burn Specific Health Scale-Brief (BSHS-B); 2) Cognitive health with MacNair Cognitive Difficulties Self-Rating Scale (CDS); 3) Mental health with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaire. PICS was considered present if at least one component out of three was abnormal. Data as mean±SD.

RESULTS

Among the 288 patients admitted during the period, 132 met the inclusion criteria: 53 patients were finally enrolled. They were aged 44 ± 18 years at the time of injury and burned 24 ± 20 BSA % and stayed 25 ± 44 days in the ICU. PICS was identified in 35 patients (66 %): more than one component was altered in 21 patients (60 %). Principal risk factors were more than 3 general anesthetics, prolonged mechanical ventilation (>4 days), ICU stay (>8 days), and hospital stay (>25 days) CONCLUSION: PICS occurred in 66 % of major burns with two or three components affected simultaneously in 60 %, i.e. more frequently than in general ICU patients.

Discomfort improvement for critically ill patients using electronic relaxation devices: results of the cross-over randomized controlled trial E-CHOISIR (Electronic-CHOIce of a System for Intensive care Relaxation)

Purpose

To assess the impact of different electronic relaxation devices on common stressful patient symptoms experienced in intensive care unit (ICU).

Methods

Sixty critically ill patients were enrolled in four relaxation sessions using a randomized cross-over design: standard relaxation (TV/radio), music therapy (MUSIC-CARE©), and two virtual reality systems using either real motion pictures (DEEPSEN©) or synthetic motion pictures (HEALTHY-MIND©). The goal was to determine which device was the best to reduce overall patient discomfort intensity (0–10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS); primary endpoint). Secondary endpoints were specific stressful symptoms (pain, anxiety, dyspnea, thirst, and lack of rest feeling) and stress response measured by Analgesia/Nociception Index (ANI). Multivariate mixed-effect analysis was used, taking into account patient characteristics and multiple measurements.

Results

Fifty patients followed the full research protocol, and ten patients did at least one research planned session of relaxation. HEALTHY-MIND© was associated with a significant decrease in overall discomfort, the primary endpoint (median NRS = 4[2–6] vs. 2[0–5]; p = 0.01, mixed-effect model), accompanied by a significant decrease in stress response (increase in ANI, secondary endpoint; p < 0.01). Regarding other secondary endpoints, each of the two virtual reality systems was associated with a decrease in anxiety (p < 0.01), while HEALTHY-MIND© was associated also with a decrease in pain (p = 0.001) and DEEPSEN© with a decrease in lack of rest (p = 0.01). Three incidents (claustrophobia/dyspnea/agitation) were reported among 109 virtual reality sessions. Cybersickness was rare (NRS = 0[0–0]).

Conclusion

Electronic relaxation therapy is a promising, safe, and effective non-pharmacological solution that can be used to improve overall discomfort in alert and non-delirious ICU patients. Its effectiveness depends on technical characteristics (virtual reality using a synthetic imagined world versus a real world or music therapy alone without virtual reality), as well as the type of symptoms.

Electronic relaxation therapies are effective supportive care tools for improving stressful symptoms in ICU patients.

Effectiveness depends on the type of symptom and the characteristics of the devices.

Overall discomfort and adrenergic stress response are more significantly improved by virtual reality using a synthetic imagined world than using a real world or music therapy alone.

The impact of sepsis on hepatic drug metabolism in critically ill patients: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Hepatic drug metabolism is important in improving drug dosing strategies in sepsis. Pharmacokinetics in the critically ill population are severely altered due to changes in absorption, distribution, excretion and metabolization. Hepatic drug metabolism might be altered due to changes in hepatic blood flow, drug metabolizing protein availability, and protein binding. The purpose of this review is to examine evidence on whether hepatic drug metabolism is significantly affected in septic patients, and to provide insights in the need for future research.

AREAS COVERED

This review describes the effect of sepsis on hepatic drug metabolism in humans. Clinical trials, pathophysiological background information and example drug groups are further discussed. The literature search has been conducted in Embase, Medline ALL Ovid, and Cochrane CENTRAL register of trials.

EXPERT OPINION

Limited research has been conducted on drug metabolism in the sepsis population, with some trials having researched healthy individuals using endotoxin injections. Notwithstanding this limitation, hepatic drug metabolism seems to be decreased for certain drugs in sepsis. More research on the pharmacokinetic behavior of hepatic metabolized drugs in sepsis is warranted, using inflammatory biomarkers, hemodynamic changes, mechanical ventilation, organ support, and catecholamine infusion as possible confounders.

Strategies to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia, ventilator-associated events, and nonventilator hospital-acquired pneumonia in acute-care hospitals: 2022 Update

The purpose of this document is to highlight practical recommendations to assist acute care hospitals to prioritize and implement strategies to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), ventilator-associated events (VAE), and non-ventilator hospital-acquired pneumonia (NV-HAP) in adults, children, and neonates. This document updates the Strategies to Prevent Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Acute Care Hospitals published in 2014. This expert guidance document is sponsored by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology (SHEA), and is the product of a collaborative effort led by SHEA, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Hospital Association, the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, and The Joint Commission, with major contributions from representatives of a number of organizations and societies with content expertise.

2021 KSCCM clinical practice guidelines for pain, agitation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disturbance in the intensive care unit

We revised and expanded the “2010 Guideline for the Use of Sedatives and Analgesics in the Adult Intensive Care Unit (ICU).” We revised the 2010 Guideline based mainly on the 2018 “Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption (PADIS) in Adult Patients in the ICU,” which was an updated 2013 pain, agitation, and delirium guideline with the inclusion of two additional topics (rehabilitation/mobility and sleep). Since it was not possible to hold face-to-face meetings of panels due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, all discussions took place via virtual conference platforms and e-mail with the participation of all panelists. All authors drafted the recommendations, and all panelists discussed and revised the recommendations several times. The quality of evidence for each recommendation was classified as high (level A), moderate (level B), or low/very low (level C), and all panelists voted on the quality level of each recommendation. The participating panelists had no conflicts of interest on related topics. The development of this guideline was independent of any industry funding. The Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility (rehabilitation/mobilization), and Sleep Disturbance panels issued 42 recommendations (level A, 6; level B, 18; and level C, 18). The 2021 clinical practice guideline provides up-to-date information on how to prevent and manage pain, agitation/sedation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disturbance in adult ICU patients. We believe that these guidelines can provide an integrated method for clinicians to manage PADIS in adult ICU patients.

Effectiveness of the ABCDEF bundle on delirium, functional outcomes and quality of life in intensive care patients: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial with embedded process evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Hospital mortality for critically ill patients has decreased significantly throughout the developed world over the past two decades, attributable to improvements in the quality of intensive care, advances in critical care medicine and technologies that provide long-term multiorgan support. However, the long-term outcomes of intensive care unit (ICU) survivors is emerging as a real issue. Cognitive and physical impairments suffered by ICU survivors are common including profound weakness, pain and delirium which are inextricably linked. This study aims to determine the effectiveness of the Assess, prevent and manage pain; Both spontaneous awakening and spontaneous breathing trials; Choice of sedation and analgesia; Delirium: assess, prevent and manage; Early mobility and exercise; Family engagement and empowerment (ABCDEF) bundle in reducing ICU-related short-term and long-term consequences of critical illness through a randomised controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study will be a single-centre, prospective RCT. A total of 150 participants will be recruited and randomised to either receive the ABCDEF bundle protocol or non-protocolised standard care for the duration of the participant's admission in the ICU. The primary outcome is delirium status measured using the Confusion Assessment Measure for ICU (CAM-ICU). Secondary outcomes include physical function measured by the Functional Independence Measure and quality of life measured by the European Quality of Life five dimensions, five-level questionnaire. A mixed-method process evaluation will contribute to understanding the experience of health teams who implement the ABCDEF bundle into practice.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was provided by the Metro South Health Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) (EC00167) and the Griffith University's HREC prior to study commencement.Study results will be disseminated by presentations at conferences and via publications to peer-review journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12620000736943; Pre-results.

The association of post-operative delirium with patient-reported outcomes and mortality after lung transplantation

Post-operative delirium after lung transplantation is common. Its associations with health-related quality of life (HRQL), depression, and mortality remains unknown. In 236 lung transplant recipients, HRQL and depressive symptoms were assessed as part of a structured survey battery before and after transplantation. Surveys included the Geriatric Depressive Scale (GDS) and Short Form 12 (SF12). Delirium was assessed throughout the post-operative intensive care unit (ICU) stay with Confusion Assessment Method for ICU. Delirium and mortality data were extracted from electronic medical records. We examined associations between delirium and changes in depressive symptoms and HRQL using linear mixed effects models and association between delirium and mortality with Cox-proportional hazard models. Post-operative delirium occurred in 34 participants (14%). Delirium was associated with attenuated improvements in SF12-PCS (difference ₋4.0; 95%CI: -7.4, -0.7) but not SF12-MCS (difference 2.2; 95%CI: -0.7,5.7) or GDS (difference ₋0.4; 95%CI: -1.5,0.7). Thirty-two participants died during the study period. Delirium was associated with increased adjusted hazard risk of mortality (HR 17.9, 95%CI: 4.4,72.5). Delirium after lung transplantation identifies a group at increased risk for poorer HRQL and death within the first post-operative year. Further studies should investigate potential causal links between delirium, and poorer HRQL and mortality risk after lung transplantation.

Patient-Level Barriers and Facilitators to Early Mobilization and the Relationship With Physical Disability Post-Intensive Care: Part 2 of an Integrative Review Through the Lens of the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health

BACKGROUND

Early mobilization (EM) is associated with reduced physical disability post-intensive care (PD PIC). Yet, contextual factors facilitate or impede delivery of EM in the intensive care unit (ICU). Only 45% of ICUs in the United States routinely practice EM despite its recognized benefits.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the evidence on the relationship between critical care EM, PD PIC, and personal (patient-level) factors, using the theoretical lens of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF).

METHOD

The Whittemore and Knafl methodology for integrative reviews and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) reporting guidelines were followed. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies (n = 38) that evaluated EM and 1 or more domains of the World Health Organization ICF were included. Quality was appraised using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. Study characteristics were evaluated for common themes and relationships. The ICF domains and subdomains pertaining to each study were synthesized.

RESULTS

Early mobilization delivery was influenced by personal factors. Deeper sedation level, the presence of delirium, higher patient acuity, the presence of medical devices, and patient weight were identified barriers to EM delivery. Patient engagement in EM was associated with improved delivery. Patients who enjoyed rehabilitation were more likely to demonstrate improvement in functional impairment than those who did not enjoy rehabilitation.

DISCUSSION

Early mobilization is associated with reduced PD PIC, yet numerous contextual factors affect the delivery of EM in the ICU. Further study of patient-level factors and EM must explore the relationship between patient engagement, baseline demographics, and functional status at ICU admission, patient-level considerations for decisions to mobilize, and EM in the ICU. This research is critical to improving the delivery of EM in the ICU and reducing PD PIC.

Searching for the Responder, Unpacking the Physical Rehabilitation Needs of Critically Ill Adults: A REVIEW

Survivors of critical illness can experience persistent deficits in physical function and poor health-related quality of life and utilize significant health care resources. Short-term improvements in these outcomes have been reported following physical rehabilitation. Safety and feasibility of delivering physical rehabilitation are established; however, low physical activity levels are observed throughout the recovery of patients. We provide examples on how physical activity may be increased through interdisciplinary models of service delivery. Recently, however, there has been an emergence of large randomized controlled trials reporting no effect on long-term patient outcomes. In this review, we use a proposed theoretical construct to unpack the findings of 12 randomized controlled trials that delivered physical rehabilitation during the acute hospital stay. We describe the search for the responder according to modifiers of treatment effect for physical function, health-related quality of life, and health care utilization outcomes. In addition, we propose tailoring and timing physical rehabilitation interventions to patient subgroups that may respond differently based on their impairments and perpetuating factors that hinder recovery. We examine in detail the timing, components, and dosage of the trial intervention arms. We also describe facilitators and barriers to physical rehabilitation implementation and factors that are influential in recovery from critical illness. Through this theoretical construct, we anticipate that physical rehabilitation programs can be better tailored to the needs of survivors to deliver appropriate interventions to patients who derive greatest benefit optimally timed in their recovery trajectory.

Implementation of an Academic-to-Community Hospital Intensive Care Unit Quality Improvement Program. Qualitative Analysis of Multilevel Facilitators and Barriers

Rationale: Implementation of evidence-based best practices is influenced by a variety of contextual factors. It is vital to characterize such factors to maintain high-quality care. Patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) are critically ill and require complex, interdisciplinary, evidence-based care to enable high-quality outcomes. Objectives: To identify facilitators and barriers to implementation of an academic-to-community hospital ICU interprofessional quality improvement program, "ICU Innovations." Methods: ICU Innovations is a multimodal quality improvement program implemented between 2014 and 2017 in six community ICUs in rural settings serving underserved patients in South Carolina. ICU Innovations includes quarterly on-site seminars and extensive behind the scenes facilitation to catalyze the implementation of evidence-based best practices. We use qualitative analysis to identify contextual factors related to program implementation processes. Guided by an implementation science framework, the Exploration, Adoption/Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment framework, we conducted semistructured key informant interviews with clinician champions at six community ICUs and six parallel interviews with ICU Innovations' leadership. We developed a qualitative coding template based on the framework and identified contextual factors associated with implementation. Standard data on hospital and ICU structure and processes of care were also collected. Results: Outer and inner factors interconnected dynamically to influence implementation of ICU Innovations. Collaborative engagement between the program developers and partner sites (outer context factor) and site program champion leadership and staff readiness for change (inner context factors) were key influences of implementation. Conclusions: This research focused on rural hospital ICUs with limited or nonexistent intensivist leadership. Although enthusiasm for the ICU Innovations program was initially high, implementation was challenging because of multiple contextual factors. Critical steps for implementation of evidence-based practice in rural hospitals include optimizing engagement with external collaborators, maximizing the role of a committed site champion, and conducting thorough site assessments to ensure staff and organizational readiness for change. Identifying barriers and facilitators to program implementation is an on-going process to tailor and improve program initiatives.

Management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 in ICU: statement from front-line intensive care experts in Wuhan, China

BACKGROUND

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) pandemic has swept all over the world, posing a great pressure on critical care resources due to large number of patients needing critical care. Statements from front-line experts in the field of intensive care are urgently needed.

METHODS

Sixteen front-line experts in China fighting against the COVID-19 epidemic in Wuhan were organized to develop an expert statement after 5 rounds of expert seminars and discussions to provide trustworthy recommendation on the management of critically ill COVID-19 patients. Each expert was assigned tasks within their field of expertise to provide draft statements and rationale. Parts of the expert statement are based on epidemiological and clinical evidence, without available scientific evidences.

RESULTS

A comprehensive document with 46 statements are presented, including protection of medical personnel, etiological treatment, diagnosis and treatment of tissue and organ functional impairment, psychological interventions, immunity therapy, nutritional support, and transportation of critically ill COVID-19 patients. Among them, 5 recommendations were strong (Grade 1), 21 were weak (Grade 2), and 20 were experts' opinions. A strong agreement from voting participants was obtained for all recommendations.

CONCLUSION

There are still no targeted therapies for COVID-19 patients. Dynamic monitoring and supportive treatment for the restoration of tissue vascularization and organ function are particularly important.

Factors associated with ABCDE bundle adherence in critically ill adults requiring mechanical ventilation: An observational design

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors associated with the ABCDEF bundle (Assess, prevent, and manage pain, Both, spontaneous awakening and breathing trials, Choice of sedation/analgesia, Delirium assess, prevent and manage, Early mobility/exercise and Family engagement/empowerment) adherence, in critically ill patients during the first 96 hours of mechanical ventilation.

DESIGN

Observational study using electronic health record data.

SETTING

15 intensive care units located in seven community hospitals in a western United States health system.

PATIENTS

977 adult patients who were on mechanical ventilation for greater than 24 hours and admitted to an intensive care unit over six months.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Multiple regression analysis was used to examine factors contributing to bundle adherence while adjusting for severity of illness, days on mechanical ventilation, hospital site and time elapsed. ABCDEF bundle adherence was higher in patients on mechanical ventilation for less than 48 hours (p = 0.01), who received continuous sedation for less than 24 hours (p < 0.001), admitted from skilled nursing facilities (p < 0.05), and over the course of the six-month study period (p < 0.01). Bundle adherence was significantly lower for Hispanic patients (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identified potentially modifiable factors that could improve the team's performance of the ABCDEF bundle in patients requiring mechanical ventilation.

Continuous Infusion Ketamine for Adjunctive Analgosedation in Mechanically Ventilated, Critically Ill Patients

OBJECTIVE

Ketamine is an N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonist with emerging evidence assessing its use as a continuous infusion agent to provide concomitant analgesia and sedation. The role of ketamine as adjunctive therapy in mechanically ventilated patients is unclear. This study sought to investigate the impact of adjunctive continuous infusion ketamine on concomitant analgesic and sedative dosing while providing goal comfort in mechanically ventilated patients.

METHODS

This retrospective two-center intrapatient comparison study included mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients who received continuous infusion ketamine with at least one other analgesic or sedative infusion. The primary outcome assessed percent relative change in concomitant analgesic-sedative doses 24 hours after ketamine initiation. Secondary outcomes included percent of Richmond Agitation and Sedation Score (RASS) assessments at goal, adverse effects, and delirium incidence. Exploratory evaluation of independent factors associated with ketamine responders (50% or more relative reduction in analgesic-sedative dosing requirements at 24 hrs) and nonresponders (less than 50% relative reduction) was performed using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Overall, 104 patients were included. A total of 160 concomitant analgesic-sedative infusions were used in combination with ketamine, most commonly fentanyl (98 [61.3%]) and propofol (46 [28.8%]). A 20% (interquartile range [IQR] -63.6 to 0.0, p<0.001) relative reduction in total analgesic-sedative infusion pharmacotherapy was achieved at 24 hours after ketamine initiation. Analgesic and sedative infusion doses decreased at 24 hours (fentanyl: pre, 175 μg/hr [IQR 100-200 μg/hr] vs post, 125 μg/hr [IQR 50-200 μg/hr], p<0.001; propofol: pre, 42.5 μg/kg/min [IQR 20.0-60.0 μg/kg/min] vs post, 20.0 μg/kg/min [IQR 3.8-31.3 μg/kg/min], p<0.001). Median percent time within goal RASS improved after ketamine initiation (pre, 7.1% [0-40%] vs post, 25% [0-66.7%], p=0.005). No differences were observed in secondary outcomes between responders and nonresponders, except a longer non-ICU hospital length of stay in responders. Independent factors associated with ketamine response included a lower body mass index, higher starting dose of ketamine, lower severity of illness, and need for multiple concomitant analgesic-sedative infusions before initiation of ketamine.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive continuous infusion ketamine promotes analgesic and sedative dose-sparing effects in mechanically ventilated patients while improving time spent within goal sedation range. Further prospective research is warranted.

Factors related to memory absence and delusional memories in patients in intensive care units managed with light sedation

OBJECTIVES

Currently, light sedation is typically given to patients in intensive care units and studies have not extensively examined the factors related to absences or abnormalities of their memories. We, therefore, analysed the factors related to the absence/abnormalities of patients' memories in intensive care units.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A secondary analysis of previously collected survey data examining patients' experiences in an intensive care unit was undertaken (n = 405; women = 38%; median age = 70 years). To observe absent or distorted memories, patients were interviewed after leaving the intensive care unit. We analysed key factors through content analysis of the interviews and field notes.

SETTING

The intensive care unit of a university hospital.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Patients' absent or distorted memories after leaving the intensive care unit.

RESULTS

Half the patients reported an absence of memories. This was associated with old age and with longer duration of mechanical ventilation. Absent or fragmentary memories were not distressing. Fragmentary and fearful intensive care unit memories were associated with being older. Delusional memories, some of which reflected actual events, were present in 3% of patients.

CONCLUSION

Absence of memories were not distressing, delusional memories occurred less and these memories could comprise of an event in ICU that is difficult for patients to understand.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the ICU

OBJECTIVE

To update and expand the 2013 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium in Adult Patients in the ICU.

DESIGN

Thirty-two international experts, four methodologists, and four critical illness survivors met virtually at least monthly. All section groups gathered face-to-face at annual Society of Critical Care Medicine congresses; virtual connections included those unable to attend. A formal conflict of interest policy was developed a priori and enforced throughout the process. Teleconferences and electronic discussions among subgroups and whole panel were part of the guidelines' development. A general content review was completed face-to-face by all panel members in January 2017.

METHODS

Content experts, methodologists, and ICU survivors were represented in each of the five sections of the guidelines: Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption). Each section created Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome, and nonactionable, descriptive questions based on perceived clinical relevance. The guideline group then voted their ranking, and patients prioritized their importance. For each Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome question, sections searched the best available evidence, determined its quality, and formulated recommendations as "strong," "conditional," or "good" practice statements based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation principles. In addition, evidence gaps and clinical caveats were explicitly identified.

RESULTS

The Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) panel issued 37 recommendations (three strong and 34 conditional), two good practice statements, and 32 ungraded, nonactionable statements. Three questions from the patient-centered prioritized question list remained without recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

We found substantial agreement among a large, interdisciplinary cohort of international experts regarding evidence supporting recommendations, and the remaining literature gaps in the assessment, prevention, and treatment of Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) in critically ill adults. Highlighting this evidence and the research needs will improve Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) management and provide the foundation for improved outcomes and science in this vulnerable population.

Recent Advances in Preventing and Managing Postoperative Delirium

Postoperative delirium is a common and harrowing complication in older surgical patients. Those with cognitive impairment or dementia are at especially high risk for developing postoperative delirium; ominously, it is hypothesized that delirium can accelerate cognitive decline and the onset of dementia, or worsen the severity of dementia. Awareness of delirium has grown in recent years as various medical societies have launched initiatives to prevent postoperative delirium and alleviate its impact. Unfortunately, delirium pathophysiology is not well understood and this likely contributes to the current state of low-quality evidence that informs perioperative guidelines. Along these lines, recent prevention trials involving ketamine and dexmedetomidine have demonstrated inconsistent findings. Non-pharmacologic multicomponent initiatives, such as the Hospital Elder Life Program, have consistently reduced delirium incidence and burden across various hospital settings. However, a substantial portion of delirium occurrences are still not prevented, and effective prevention and management strategies are needed to complement such multicomponent non-pharmacologic therapies. In this narrative review, we examine the current understanding of delirium neurobiology and summarize the present state of prevention and management efforts.

Pharmacologic Considerations Surrounding Sedation, Delirium, and Sleep in Critically Ill Adults: A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Agitation, delirium, and sleep dysfunction in the intensive care unit (ICU) are common occurrences that result in negative patient outcomes. With the recent publication of the 2018 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the ICU (PAD-IS), several areas are of particular interest due to emerging literature or conflicting results of research.

OBJECTIVE

To highlight areas where emerging literature or variable study results exist and to provide the clinician with recommendations regarding patient management.

METHODS

The 2018 PAD-IS guidelines were reviewed, and areas of emerging literature or lack of consensus of included investigations surrounding pharmacologic management of sedation, delirium, and sleep in the ICU were identified. A review and appraisal of the literature was conducted specifically to address the identified areas. Prospective, randomized trials were included in this narrative review.

RESULTS

Four areas with emerging data or conflicting evidence were identified and included: use of propofol or dexmedetomidine for sedation, pharmacologic prevention of delirium, treatment of delirium, and pharmacologic strategies to improve sleep.

CONCLUSION

A comprehensive approach to the prevention and management of delirium, sedation, and sleep in the ICU is necessary to optimize patient outcomes.