Evaluation of a clinical pathway for sedation and analgesia of mechanically ventilated patients in a cardiac intensive care unit (CICU): The Brigham and Women's Hospital Levine CICU sedation pathways

Comparison of programmed sedation care with conventional care in patients receiving mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of planned sedation therapy in comparison to standard care for patients receiving mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure (ARF).

METHOD

The research included a total of sixty individuals who underwent mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure (ARF). Utilizing the random number table method, these patients were randomized at random to either the planned sedation care group (Group PSC) or the conventional care group (Group C). The objective was to assess and contrast the impact of treatment on the two groups. Significantly shorter durations of mechanical ventilation, sedative use, ICU therapy, length of stay, incidence of delirium, and adverse events were observed in Group PSC compared with Group C (P < 0.05). A higher 1-month survival rate following mechanical ventilation, a higher post-intervention forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) as a percentage of the expected value, a higher post-intervention forced vital capacity (FVC), and a higher patient family care satisfaction rate were observed in Group PSC compared to Group C (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The scheduled administration of sedative therapy in patients receiving mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure (ARF) offers significant, reliable, and effective therapeutic benefits.

Implementation of a Nurse-Driven Spontaneous Awakening Trial Protocol in a Cardiac Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

In patients receiving mechanical ventilation, spontaneous awakening trials reduce morbidity and mortality when paired with spontaneous breathing trials. However, spontaneous awakening trials are not performed every day they are indicated and little is known about spontaneous awakening trial protocol use in cardiac intensive care units.

LOCAL PROBLEM

Spontaneous awakening trial completion rate at the study institution was low and no trial protocol was regularly used.

METHODS

A preintervention-postintervention retrospective cohort study was performed in adult patients with at least 24 hours of invasive mechanical ventilation in Michigan Medicine's cardiac intensive care unit. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were excluded. Data included demographics, sedation, mechanical ventilation duration, and in-hospital mortality. A nurse-driven spontaneous awakening trial protocol modified for the cardiac intensive care unit was implemented in October 2020.

RESULTS

Compared with the preintervention cohort (n = 29, May through July 2020), the postintervention cohort (n = 27, October 2020 through February 2021) had a higher ratio of number of trials performed to number of days eligible for trial (0.91 vs 0.52; P < .01). Median continuous sedative infusion duration was shorter after intervention (2.3 vs 3.6 days; P = .02). Median mechanical ventilation duration (3.8 vs 4.7 days; P = .18) and mortality (41% vs 41%; P = .95) were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Spontaneous awakening trial protocol implementation led to a higher trial completion rate and a shorter duration of continuous sedative infusion. Larger studies are needed to assess the impact of protocolized spontaneous awakening trials on cardiac intensive care unit patient outcomes.

Action research improved general prerequisites for evidence-based practice

The present study was part of an action research project that was performed to implement a clinical pathway for patients on mechanical ventilation and simultaneously explore the implementation process in a Swedish intensive care unit. The aim of this questionnaire study was to evaluate whether an action research methodology could affect the general prerequisites for evidence-based practice (EBP). Informed by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (PARIHS) framework, the study included registered nurses, assistant nurses and anesthesiologists in the unit at start of the project (n = 50) and at follow-up (n = 44). Data was collected with the Evaluation Before Implementation Questionnaire and the Attitudes towards Guidelines Scale.

The results revealed that the general prerequisites for EBP in the setting improved. Compared to baseline measurements, the staff at follow-up conversed significantly more about the importance of the patients’ experiences, research utilization, context and facilitation, while changes with respect to clinical experiences were not significant. The attitudes towards guidelines were perceived as positive at baseline as well as at follow-up and did not significantly change.

Longer professional experience was associated with a slightly lower probability of perceiving that the importance of research utilization was discussed and reflected upon, while belonging to a profession with longer education was associated with a higher probability of this perception. Compared to registered nurses and assistant nurses, the anesthesiologists perceived, to a greater extent, that the importance of clinical experience was discussed and reflected upon in the setting, while there was no significant association with the length of professional experience and/or specific professions regarding the other components.

In conclusion, using action research to implement a clinical pathway methodology seems to set in motion various mechanisms that improve some but not all prerequisites that, according to the PARIHS framework, are advantageous for EBP.

Prevention of Complications in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Contemporary cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) have an increasing prevalence of noncardiovascular comorbidities and multisystem organ dysfunction. However, little guidance exists to support the development of best-practice principles specific to the CICU. This scientific statement evaluates strategies to avoid the potentially preventable complications encountered within contemporary CICUs, focusing on those that are most applicable to the CICU environment. This scientific statement reviews evidence-based practices derived in non–CICU populations, assesses their relevance to CICU practice, and highlights key knowledge gaps warranting further investigation to attenuate patient risk.

Advanced Respiratory Support in the Contemporary Cardiac ICU

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

The medical complexity and critical care needs of patients admitted to cardiac ICUs are increasing, and prospective studies examining the underlying cardiac and noncardiac diagnoses, the management strategies, and the prognosis of cardiac ICU patients with respiratory failure are needed.

Financial impact of an analgosedation protocol for mechanically ventilated patients in a cardiovascular intensive care unit

PURPOSE

The primary objective was to evaluate the impact of an analgosedation protocol in a cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) on daily doses and costs of analgesic, sedative, and antipsychotic medications.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center quasi-experimental study in 363 mechanically ventilated patients admitted to our CICU from March 1, 2011, to April 13, 2013. On March 1, 2012, an analgosedation protocol was implemented. Patients in the pre-implementation group were managed at the cardiologist's discretion, which consisted of a continuous sedative-hypnotic approach and opioids as needed. Patients in the implementation group were managed using this protocol.

RESULTS

The mean ± S.D. per-patient doses (mg/day) of propofol, lorazepam, and clonazepam decreased with the use of an analgosedation protocol (propofol 132,265.7 ± 12,951 versus 87,980.5 ± 10,564 [p = 0.03]; lorazepam 10.5 ± 7.3 versus 3.3 ± 4.0 [p < 0.001]; clonazepam 9.9 ± 8.3 versus 1.1 ± 0.5 [p = 0.03]). The mean daily cost of propofol and lorazepam also significantly decreased (33.5% reduction in propofol cost [p = 0.03]; 69.0% reduction in lorazepam cost [p < 0.001]). The per-patient dose and cost of fentanyl (mcg/day) declined with analgosedation protocol use (fentanyl 2,274.2 ± 2317.4 versus 1,026.7 ± 981.4 [p < 0.001]; 54.8% decrease in fentanyl cost [p < 0.001]).

CONCLUSION

The implementation of an analgosedation protocol significantly decreased both the use and cost of propofol, lorazepam, and fentanyl. Further investigation of the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of a critical care consultation service with implementation of an analgosedation protocol is warranted in the CICU.

Positive Pressure Ventilation in Cardiogenic Shock: Review of the Evidence and Practical Advice for Patients With Mechanical Circulatory Support

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is often complicated by respiratory failure, and more than 80% of patients with CS require respiratory support. Elevated filling pressures from left-ventricular (LV) dysfunction lead to alveolar pulmonary edema, which impairs both oxygenation and ventilation. The implementation of positive pressure ventilation (PPV) improves gas exchange and can improve cardiovascular hemodynamics by reducing preload and afterload of the LV, reducing mitral regurgitation and decreasing myocardial oxygen demand, all of which can help augment cardiac output and improve tissue perfusion. In right ventricular (RV) failure, however, PPV can potentially decrease preload and increase afterload, which can potentially lead to hemodynamic deterioration. Thus, a working understanding of cardiopulmonary interactions during PPV in LV and RV dominant CS states is required to safely treat this complex and high-acuity group of patients with respiratory failure. Herein, we provide a review of the published literature with a comprehensive discussion of the available evidence on the use of PPV in CS. Furthermore, we provide a practical framework for the selection of ventilator settings in patients with and without mechanical circulatory support, induction, and sedation methods, and an algorithm for liberation from PPV in patients with CS.

Reducing Radiation and Lowering Costs With a Standardized Care Pathway for Nonoperative Thoracolumbar Fractures

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE

There is marked variation in the management of nonoperative thoracolumbar (TL) compression and burst fractures. This was a quality improvement study designed to establish a standardized care pathway for TL fractures treated with bracing, and to then evaluate differences in radiographs, length of stay (LOS), and cost before and after the pathway.

METHODS

A standardized pathway was established for management of nonoperative TL burst and compression fractures (AOSpine classification type A1-A4 fractures). Bracing, radiographs, costs, complications, and LOS before and after pathway adoption were analyzed. Differences between the neurosurgery and orthopedic spine services were compared.

RESULTS

Between 2012 and 2015, 406 nonoperative burst and compression TL fractures were identified. A total of 183 (45.1%) were braced, 60.6% with a custom-made thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO) and 39.4% with an off-the-shelf TLSO. The number of radiographs significantly reduced after initiation of the pathway (3.23 vs 2.63, P = .010). A total of 98.6% of braces were custom-made before the pathway; 69.6% were off-the-shelf after the pathway. The total cost for braced patients after pathway adoption decreased from $10 462.36 to $8928.58 (P = .078). Brace-associated costs were significantly less for off-the-shelf TSLO versus custom TLSO ($1352.41 vs $3719.53, respectively, P < .001). The mean LOS and complication rate did not change significantly following pathway adoption. The orthopedic spine service braced less frequently than the neurosurgery service (40.7% vs 52.2%, P = .023).

CONCLUSIONS

Standardized care pathways can reduce cost and radiation exposure without increasing complication rates in nonoperative management of thoracolumbar compression and burst fractures.

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.

Struggling for a feasible tool - the process of implementing a clinical pathway in intensive care: a grounded theory study

BACKGROUND

Clinical pathways can enhance care quality, promote patient safety and optimize resource utilization. However, they are infrequently utilized in intensive care. This study aimed to explain the implementation process of a clinical pathway based on a bottom-up approach in an intensive care context.

METHODS

The setting was an 11-bed general intensive care unit in Sweden. An action research project was conducted to implement a clinical pathway for patients on mechanical ventilation. The project was managed by a local interprofessional core group and was externally facilitated by two researchers. Grounded theory was used by the researchers to explain the implementation process. The sampling in the study was purposeful and theoretical and included registered nurses (n31), assistant nurses (n26), anesthesiologists (n11), a physiotherapist (n1), first- and second-line managers (n2), and health records from patients on mechanical ventilation (n136). Data were collected from 2011 to 2016 through questionnaires, repeated focus groups, individual interviews, logbooks/field notes and health records. Constant comparative analysis was conducted, including both qualitative data and descriptive statistics from the quantitative data.

RESULTS

A conceptual model of the clinical pathway implementation process emerged, and a central phenomenon, which was conceptualized as 'Struggling for a feasible tool,' was the core category that linked all categories. The phenomenon evolved from the 'Triggers' ('Perceiving suboptimal practice' and 'Receiving external inspiration and support'), pervaded the 'Implementation process' ('Contextual circumstances,' 'Processual circumstances' and 'Negotiating to achieve progress'), and led to the process 'Output' ('Varying utilization' and 'Improvements in understanding and practice'). The categories included both facilitating and impeding factors that made the implementation process tentative and prolonged but also educational.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings provide a novel understanding of a bottom-up implementation of a clinical pathway in an intensive care context. Despite resonating well with existing implementation frameworks/theories, the conceptual model further illuminates the complex interaction between different circumstances and negotiations and how this interplay has consequences for the implementation process and output. The findings advocate a bottom-up approach but also emphasize the need for strategic priority, interprofessional participation, skilled facilitators and further collaboration.

Editor’s Choice-Prospective registry of cardiac critical illness in a modern tertiary care Cardiac Intensive Care Unit

Background:

The changing landscape of care in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit (CICU) has prompted efforts to redesign the structure and organization of advanced CICUs. Few studies have quantitatively characterized current demographics, diagnoses, and outcomes in the contemporary CICU.

Methods:

We evaluated patients in a prospective observational database, created to support quality improvement and clinical care redesign in an AHA Level 1 (advanced) CICU at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. All consecutive patients ( N=2193) admitted from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2017 were included at the time of admission to the CICU.

Results:

The median age was 65 years (43% >70 years) and 44% of patients were women. Non-cardiovascular comorbidities were common, including chronic kidney disease (27%), pulmonary disease (22%), and active cancer (13%). Only 7% of CICU admissions were primarily for an acute coronary syndrome, which was the seventh most common individual diagnosis. The top three reasons for admission to the CICU were shock/hypotension (26%), cardiopulmonary arrest (11%), or primary arrhythmia without arrest (9%). Respiratory failure was a primary or major secondary reason for triage to the CICU in 17%. In-hospital mortality was 17.6%.

Conclusions:

In a tertiary, academic, advanced CICU, patients are elderly with a high burden of non-cardiovascular comorbid conditions. Care has shifted from ACS toward predominantly shock and cardiac arrest, as well as non-ischemic conditions, and the mortality of these conditions is high. These data may be useful to guide cardiac critical care redesign.

Editor’s Choice- Sedation in the coronary intensive care unit: An adapted algorithm for critically ill cardiovascular patient

In the current era, cardiovascular intensive care units care for more complex patients who are far sicker than historical post-myocardial infarction patients, and sedation has become a common intervention in these units. Current sedation best practices derive mainly from non-cardiac units which limits their generalization to the critically ill cardiac patient. Thus, a great variability in sedation protocols, especially the selection of sedative agents, is commonly seen in daily practice across cardiac units. We present an updated review on sedation in cardiovascular critical care medicine with emphasis on the hemodynamic impact. The goal of this review is to generate a general sedation algorithm specific for the cardiac patient.

Editor's Choice-The cardiovascular implications of sedatives in the cardiac intensive care unit

Patients admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit frequently develop multi-organ system dysfunction associated with their cardiac disease. In many cases, invasive mechanical ventilation is required, which often necessitates sedation for patient-ventilator synchrony, reduction of work of breathing, and patient comfort. In this paper, we describe the use of common sedatives available in the endotracheally intubated critically ill patient and emphasize the clinical and cardiovascular effects. We review γ-aminobutyric acid agonists such as etomidate, benzodiazepines, and propofol, the centrally acting α₂-agonist dexmedetomidine, and the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist ketamine. Additionally, we outline the use of opioids and their role in potentiating other sedatives. We note that some sedatives are associated with increased delirium rates, and emphasize that judicious strategies minimizing sedative use are associated with decreases in morbidity and mortality. We also discuss standardized sedation assessment scales and highlight the importance of sedation weaning. Finally, we offer recommendations for sedation use during therapeutic hypothermia, and discuss the use of adjuvant neuromuscular blocking agents.

Mechanical ventilation and mobilization: comparison between genders

[Purpose] To investigate the impact of gender on mobilization and mechanical ventilation in hospitalized patients in an intensive care unit. [Subjects and Methods] A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted of the medical records of 105 patients admitted to a general intensive care unit. The length of mechanical ventilation, length of intensive care unit stay, weaning, time to sitting out of bed, time to performing active exercises, and withdrawal of sedation exercises were evaluated in addition to the characteristics of individuals, reasons for admission and risk scores. [Results] Women had significantly lower values APACHE II scores, duration of mechanical ventilation, time to withdrawal of sedation and time to onset of active exercises. [Conclusion] Women have a better functional response when admitted to the intensive care unit, spending less time ventilated and performing active exercises earlier.

Factors affecting the implementation process of clinical pathways: a mixed method study within the context of Swedish intensive care

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Clinical pathways (CPs) can improve quality of care on intensive care units (ICUs), but are infrequently utilized and of varying quality. Knowledge regarding factors that facilitate versus hinder successful implementation of CPs is insufficient and a better understanding of the activities and individuals involved is needed. The aim of this study was to explore the implementation process of CPs within the context of ICUs.

METHODS

An exploratory design with a sequential mixed method was used. A CP survey, including all Swedish ICUs, was used to collect quantitative data from ICUs using CPs (n = 15) and interviews with key informants (n = 10) were used to collect qualitative data from the same ICUs. Descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis were used, and the quantitative and qualitative findings were integrated.

RESULTS

The CP implementation was conceptualized according to two interplaying themes: a process to realize the usefulness of CPs and create new habits; and a necessity of enthusiasm, support and time. Multiple factors affected the process and those factors were organized in six main categories and 14 subcategories.

CONCLUSIONS

Bottom-up initiatives, interprofessional project groups and small ICUs seem to enhance successful implementation of CPs while inadequate electronic health record systems, insufficient support and time constrains can be barriers. Support regarding the whole implementation process from centralized units at the local hospitals, as well as cooperation between ICUs and national guidance, has the potential to raise the quality of CPs and benefit the progress of CP implementation.