Sleep-Promotion Bundle Development, Implementation, and Evaluation in Critically Ill Adults: Roles for Pharmacists

A Rapid Systematic Review of Pharmacologic Sleep Promotion Modalities in the Intensive Care Unit

Background: The Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Pain, Agitation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep recommend protocolized non-pharmacologic sleep improvement. Pharmacologic interventions are frequently initiated to promote sleep but the evidence supporting these strategies remains controversial. Purpose: To systematically search and synthesize evidence evaluating pharmacologic sleep promotion modalities in critically ill adults. Methods: A rapid systematic review protocol was used to search Medline, Cochrane Library, and Embase for reports published through October 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and before-and-after cohort studies evaluating pharmacologic modalities intended to improve sleep in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Sleep-related endpoints were the primary outcome of interest. Study and patient characteristics and relevant safety and non-sleep outcome data were also collected. The Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias or Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions were used to assess the risk of bias for all included studies. Results: Sixteen studies (75% RCTs) enrolling 2573 patients were included; 1207 patients were allocated to the pharmacologic sleep intervention. Most studies utilized dexmedetomidine (7/16; total n = 505 patients) or a melatonin agonist (6/16; total n = 592 patients). Only half of the studies incorporated a sleep promotion protocol as standard of care. Most (11/16, 68.8%) studies demonstrated a significant improvement in ≥1 sleep endpoint (n = 5 dexmedetomidine, n = 3 melatonin agonists, n = 2 propofol/benzodiazepines). Risk of bias was generally low for RCTs and moderate-severe for cohort studies. Conclusions: Dexmedetomidine and melatonin agonists are the most studied pharmacologic sleep promotion modalities, but current evidence does not support their routine administration in the ICU to improve sleep. Future RCTs evaluating pharmacologic modalities for ICU sleep should consider patients' baseline and ICU risks for disrupted sleep, incorporate a non-pharmacologic sleep improvement protocol, and evaluate the effect of these medication interventions on circadian rhythm, physiologic sleep, patient-perceived sleep quality, and delirium.

Causes, Consequences, and Treatments of Sleep and Circadian Disruption in the ICU: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement

Background: Sleep and circadian disruption (SCD) is common and severe in the ICU. On the basis of rigorous evidence in non-ICU populations and emerging evidence in ICU populations, SCD is likely to have a profound negative impact on patient outcomes. Thus, it is urgent that we establish research priorities to advance understanding of ICU SCD. Methods: We convened a multidisciplinary group with relevant expertise to participate in an American Thoracic Society Workshop. Workshop objectives included identifying ICU SCD subtopics of interest, key knowledge gaps, and research priorities. Members attended remote sessions from March to November 2021. Recorded presentations were prepared and viewed by members before Workshop sessions. Workshop discussion focused on key gaps and related research priorities. The priorities listed herein were selected on the basis of rank as established by a series of anonymous surveys. Results: We identified the following research priorities: establish an ICU SCD definition, further develop rigorous and feasible ICU SCD measures, test associations between ICU SCD domains and outcomes, promote the inclusion of mechanistic and patient-centered outcomes within large clinical studies, leverage implementation science strategies to maximize intervention fidelity and sustainability, and collaborate among investigators to harmonize methods and promote multisite investigation. Conclusions: ICU SCD is a complex and compelling potential target for improving ICU outcomes. Given the influence on all other research priorities, further development of rigorous, feasible ICU SCD measurement is a key next step in advancing the field.

Sleep in the intensive care unit

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Sleep is particularly important for critically ill patients. Here, we review the latest evidence on how sleep and circadian disruption in the intensive care unit (ICU) affects physiology and clinical outcomes, as well as the most recent advances in sleep and circadian rhythm promoting interventions including therapeutics.

RECENT FINDINGS

On a molecular level, clock genes dysrhythmia and altered immunity are clearly linked, particularly in sepsis. Melatonin may also be associated with insulin sensitivity in ICU patients. Clinically, changes in sleep architecture are associated with delirium, and sleep-promoting interventions in the form of multifaceted care bundles may reduce its incidence. Regarding medications, one recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) on melatonin showed no difference in sleep quality or incidence of delirium.

SUMMARY

Further investigation is needed to establish the clinical relevance of sleep and circadian disruption in the ICU. For interventions, standardized protocols of sleep promotion bundles require validation by larger multicenter trials. Administratively, such protocols should be individualized to both organizational and independent patient needs. Incorporating pharmacotherapy such as melatonin and nocturnal dexmedetomidine requires further evaluation in large RCTs.

The accuracy of simple, feasible alternatives to polysomnography for assessing sleep in intensive care: An observational study

BACKGROUND

Sleep disturbance is common in intensive care patients. Understanding the accuracy of simple, feasible sleep measurement techniques is essential to informing their possible role in usual clinical care.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to investigate whether sleep monitoring techniques such as actigraphy (ACTG), behavioural assessments, and patient surveys are comparable with polysomnography (PSG) in accurately reporting sleep quantity and quality among conscious, intensive care patients.

METHODS

An observational study was conducted in 20 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) for a minimum duration of 24 h, who underwent concurrent sleep monitoring via PSG, ACTG, nursing-based observations, and self-reported assessment using the Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire.

RESULTS

The reported total sleep time (TST) for the 20 participants measured by PSG was 328.2 min (±106 min) compared with ACTG (362.4 min [±62.1 min]; mean difference = 34.22 min [±129 min]). Bland-Altman analysis indicated that PSG and ACTG demonstrated clinical agreement and did not perform differently across a number of sleep variables including TST, awakening, sleep-onset latency, and sleep efficiency. Nursing observations overestimated sleep duration compared to PSG TST (mean difference = 9.95 ± 136.3 min, p > 0.05), and patient-reported TST was underestimated compared to PSG TST (mean difference = -51.81 ± 144.1 7, p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Amongst conscious patients treated in the ICU, sleep characteristics measured by ACTG were similar to those measured by PSG. ACTG may provide a clinically feasible and acceptable proxy approach to sleep monitoring in conscious ICU patients.