1
|
Aljuhani O, Al Sulaiman K, Korayem GB, Altebainawi AF, Alshaya A, Nahari M, Alsamnan K, Alkathiri MA, Al-Dosari BS, Alenazi AA, Alsohimi S, Alnajjar LI, Alfaifi M, AlQussair N, Alanazi RM, Alhmoud MF, Alanazi NL, Alkofide H, Alenezi AM, Vishwakarma R. Ketamine-based Sedation Use in Mechanically Ventilated Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: A Multicenter Cohort Study. Saudi Pharm J 2024; 32:102061. [PMID: 38596319 PMCID: PMC11002878 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsps.2024.102061] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2023] [Accepted: 04/01/2024] [Indexed: 04/11/2024] Open
Abstract
Backgrounds Ketamine possesses analgesia, anti-inflammation, anticonvulsant, and neuroprotection properties. However, the evidence that supports its use in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients with COVID-19 is insufficient. The study's goal was to assess ketamine's effectiveness and safety in critically ill, mechanically ventilated (MV) patients with COVID-19. Methods Adult critically ill patients with COVID-19 were included in a multicenter retrospective-prospective cohort study. Patients admitted between March 1, 2020, and July 31, 2021, to five ICUs in Saudi Arabia were included. Eligible patients who required MV within 24 hours of ICU admission were divided into two sub-cohort groups based on their use of ketamine (Control vs. Ketamine). The primary outcome was the length of stay (LOS) in the hospital. P/F ratio differences, lactic acid normalization, MV duration, and mortality were considered secondary outcomes. Propensity score (PS) matching was used (1:2 ratio) based on the selected criteria. Results In total, 1,130 patients met the eligibility criteria. Among these, 1036 patients (91.7 %) were in the control group, whereas 94 patients (8.3 %) received ketamine. The total number of patients after PS matching, was 264 patients, including 88 patients (33.3 %) who received ketamine. The ketamine group's LOS was significantly lower (beta coefficient (95 % CI): -0.26 (-0.45, -0.07), P = 0.008). Furthermore, the PaO2/FiO2 ratio significantly improved 24 hours after the start of ketamine treatment compared to the pre-treatment period (6 hours) (124.9 (92.1, 184.5) vs. 106 (73.1, 129.3; P = 0.002). Additionally, the ketamine group had a substantially shorter mean time for lactic acid normalization (beta coefficient (95 % CI): -1.55 (-2.42, -0.69), P 0.01). However, there were no significant differences in the duration of MV or mortality. Conclusions Ketamine-based sedation was associated with lower hospital LOS and faster lactic acid normalization but no mortality benefits in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Thus, larger prospective studies are recommended to assess the safety and effectiveness of ketamine as a sedative in critically ill adult patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ohoud Aljuhani
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
| | - Khalid Al Sulaiman
- Pharmaceutical Care Department, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
- College of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
- King Abdullah International Medical Research Center-King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Ministry of National Guard – Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
- Saudi Critical Care Pharmacy Research (SCAPE) Platform, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
- Saudi Society for Multidisciplinary Research Development and Education (SCAPE Society), Riyadh, Saudi Arbia
| | - Ghazwa B. Korayem
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, College of Pharmacy, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, P.O. Box 84428, Riyadh 11671, Saudi Arabia
| | - Ali F. Altebainawi
- Pharmaceutical Care Services, King Salman Specialist Hospital, Hail Health Cluster, Hail, Saudi Arabia
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, University of Hail, Hail, Saudi Arabia
| | - Abdulrahman Alshaya
- Pharmaceutical Care Department, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
- College of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
- King Abdullah International Medical Research Center-King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Ministry of National Guard – Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Majed Nahari
- Pharmaceutical Care Services, King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Khuzama Alsamnan
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, College of Pharmacy, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, P.O. Box 84428, Riyadh 11671, Saudi Arabia
| | - Munirah A. Alkathiri
- Pharmaceutical Care Department, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Bodoor S. Al-Dosari
- Pharmaceutical Care Services, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
| | - Abeer A. Alenazi
- Pharmaceutical Care Department, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Samiah Alsohimi
- Pharmaceutical Care Department, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Lina I. Alnajjar
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, College of Pharmacy, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, P.O. Box 84428, Riyadh 11671, Saudi Arabia
| | - Mashael Alfaifi
- Pharmaceutical Care Department, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Nora AlQussair
- Pharmaceutical Care Department, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Reem M. Alanazi
- College of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Munirah F. Alhmoud
- College of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Nadin L. Alanazi
- Pharmaceutical Care Department, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Hadeel Alkofide
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Aljawharah M. Alenezi
- College of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Ramesh Vishwakarma
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abdildin Y, Tapinova K, Nemerenova A, Viderman D. The impact of ketamine on outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials. Acute Crit Care 2024; 39:34-46. [PMID: 38476062 PMCID: PMC11002615 DOI: 10.4266/acc.2023.00829] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2023] [Revised: 12/25/2023] [Accepted: 01/03/2024] [Indexed: 03/14/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effects of ketamine in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients. METHODS We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library; the search was performed initially in January but was repeated in December of 2023. We focused on ICU patients of any age. We included studies that compared ketamine with other traditional agents used in the ICU. We synthesized evidence using RevMan v5.4 and presented the results as forest plots. We also used trial sequential analysis (TSA) software v. 0.9.5.10 Beta and presented results as TSA plots. For synthesizing results, we used a random-effects model and reported differences in outcomes of two groups in terms of mean difference (MD), standardized MD, and risk ratio with 95% confidence interval. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB tool for RCTs. Our outcomes were mortality, pain, opioid and midazolam requirements, delirium rates, and ICU length of stay. RESULTS Twelve RCTs involving 805 ICU patients (ketamine group, n=398; control group, n=407) were included in the meta-analysis. The ketamine group was not superior to the control group in terms of mortality (in five studies with 318 patients), pain (two studies with 129 patients), mean and cumulative opioid consumption (six studies with 494 patients), midazolam consumption (six studies with 304 patients), and ICU length of stay (three studies with 270 patients). However, the model favored the ketamine group over the control group in delirium rate (four studies with 358 patients). This result is significant in terms of conventional boundaries (alpha=5%) but is not robust in sequential analysis. The applicability of the findings is limited by the small number of patients pooled for each outcome. CONCLUSIONS Our meta-analysis did not demonstrate differences between ketamine and control groups regarding any outcome except delirium rate, where the model favored the ketamine group over the control group. However, this result is not robust as sensitivity analysis and trial sequential analysis suggest that more RCTs should be conducted in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yerkin Abdildin
- Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, School of Engineering and Digital Sciences, Nazarbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan
| | - Karina Tapinova
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Assel Nemerenova
- Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, School of Engineering and Digital Sciences, Nazarbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan
| | - Dmitriy Viderman
- Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Nazarbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan
- Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care, and Pain Medicine, National Research Oncology Center, Astana, Kazakhstan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ketamine Infusion for Sedation and Analgesia during Mechanical Ventilation in the ICU: A Multicenter Evaluation. Crit Care Res Pract 2022; 2022:9853344. [PMID: 36504505 PMCID: PMC9729046 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9853344] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2022] [Revised: 11/08/2022] [Accepted: 11/09/2022] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Methods We reviewed the electronic medical record of critically ill adults who received a continuous infusion of ketamine for ≥24 hours during invasive mechanical ventilation in three hospitals over a two-year period. We captured data including ketamine indication, dose, unintended effects, and adjustments to coadministered sedatives or opioids. We analyzed these data to determine the incidence of reported unintended effects of ketamine infusion (primary outcome) and changes in exposure to coadministered sedatives or opioids during ketamine use (secondary outcome). Results 95 mechanically ventilated adults received a ketamine infusion for a median duration of 75 hours (interquartile range [IQR] 44-115) at a mean ± standard deviation (SD) infusion rate of 1.3 ± 0.5 mg/kg/hour for the first 24 hours. At least one unintended effect attributed to ketamine was documented in 24% of cases, most frequently tachycardia (6%) and sialorrhea (6%). Other sedative or opioid infusions were administered with ketamine in 76% and 92% of cases, respectively. Comparing the total amount of sedative or opioid administered in the 24 hours prior to ketamine infusion with the total amount administered during the first 24 hours on ketamine, there were no significant differences in propofol, midazolam, or dexmedetomidine exposure, but the average fentanyl exposure was higher after ketamine (2740 ± 1812 mcg) than before (1975 ± 1860 mcg) (absolute difference 766 mcg, 95% confidence interval [CI] 442 to 1089 mcg). Conclusions In this multicenter cohort of critically ill, mechanically ventilated adults, ketamine infusion was primarily used as an adjunct to conventional sedative and opioid infusions, with noticeable but unintended effects potentially related to ketamine in nearly one-quarter of cases.
Collapse
|
4
|
Tiberio PJ, Prendergast NT, Girard TD. Pharmacologic Management of Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit. Clin Chest Med 2022; 43:411-424. [PMID: 36116811 DOI: 10.1016/j.ccm.2022.04.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Delirium, often underdiagnosed in the intensive care unit, is a common complication of critical illness that contributes to significant morbidity and mortality. Clinicians should be aware of common risk factors and triggers and should work to mitigate these as much as possible to reduce the occurrence of delirium. This review first provides an overview of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, evaluation, and consequences of delirium in critically ill patients. Presented next is the current evidence for the pharmacologic management of delirium, focusing on prevention and treatment of delirium in the intensive care unit. It concludes by outlining some emerging treatments of delirium.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Perry J Tiberio
- Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, NW 628 UPMC Montefiore, 3459 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA
| | - Niall T Prendergast
- Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, NW 628 UPMC Montefiore, 3459 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA
| | - Timothy D Girard
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, The Clinical Research, Investigation, and Systems Modeling of Acute Illness (CRISMA) Center, University of Pittsburgh, 3520 Fifth Avenue, 101 Keystone Building, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Temporal Trends and Variability in Ketamine Use for Mechanically Ventilated Adults in the United States. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2022; 19:1534-1542. [PMID: 35176218 DOI: 10.1513/annalsats.202112-1376oc] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Rationale The epidemiology of continuous ketamine use in the management of critically ill adults receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) in the U.S. is unknown. Objective To quantify the temporal trends and variation across U.S. hospitals in continuous ketamine use. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults (age ≥18) receiving MV who were discharged (alive or dead) from U.S. hospitals contributing data to the Premier Healthcare Database between January 2008 and September 2018. We used mixed effects multivariable logistic regression modeling (fixed effects: patient and hospital characteristics; random effect: discharge hospital) to evaluate the associations of discharge quarter and discharge hospital with continuous ketamine use (defined as a charge for intravenous ketamine on ≥2 consecutive calendar days). Results We identified 2,059,599 MV adults across 842 hospitals; of these, 7,927 (0.4%) received continuous ketamine. Ketamine use increased over time from 0.07% of all patients in quarter 1 2008 to 1.1% of all patients in quarter 3 2018. After adjustment, the odds of receiving continuous ketamine were consistently increased starting in quarter 4 2011 (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.83 [1.09-3.06] vs quarter 1 2008, p=0.023) with >10-fold increased odds starting in quarter 2 2017. Out of 842 hospitals, 486 (57.7%) used continuous ketamine on at least one cohort patient during the study period. Across these hospitals ever using ketamine, median use was 0.2% (IQR 0.08%-0.5%) with 5 hospitals using continuous ketamine in >5% of patients. The adjusted median odds ratio for discharge hospital was 3.72 (95% confidence interval: 3.37-4.13) which was higher than the odds ratio for any patient or hospital covariable other than discharge quarter. Conclusions In U.S. hospitals, use of continuous infusion ketamine increased markedly over time in critically ill patients receiving MV, with substantial variability between hospitals. Given the unique properties of ketamine as a sedative, further research is needed to assess its safety and utility in critically ill populations.
Collapse
|
6
|
Alshaya AI, Alhammad AM, Ismail N, Alkhani N, Alharbi S, Alenazi AO, Aljuhani O. Critical care pharmacy in Saudi Arabia: Historical evolution and future directions—A review by the Critical Care and Emergency Medicine Pharmacy Specialty Network at the Saudi Society of Clinical Pharmacy. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CLINICAL PHARMACY 2021. [DOI: 10.1002/jac5.1518] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Abdulrahman I. Alshaya
- College of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences Riyadh Saudi Arabia
- King Abdulaziz Medical City, National Guard Health Affairs Riyadh Saudi Arabia
- King Abdullah International Medical Research Center Riyadh Saudi Arabia
| | - Abdullah M. Alhammad
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy College of Pharmacy, King Saud University Riyadh Saudi Arabia
- Department of Pharmacy Services King Saud University Medical City Riyadh Saudi Arabia
| | - Nadia Ismail
- King Fahad Hospital of the University, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University Alkhobar Saudi Arabia
| | - Nada Alkhani
- Pharmacy Services Administration King Fahad Medical City Riyadh Saudi Arabia
| | - Shmeylan Alharbi
- College of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences Riyadh Saudi Arabia
- King Abdulaziz Medical City, National Guard Health Affairs Riyadh Saudi Arabia
- King Abdullah International Medical Research Center Riyadh Saudi Arabia
| | - Ahmed O. Alenazi
- College of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences Riyadh Saudi Arabia
- King Abdullah International Medical Research Center Riyadh Saudi Arabia
- Imam Abdulrahman Alfaisal Hospital, National Guard Health Affairs Dammam Saudi Arabia
| | - Ohoud Aljuhani
- Pharmacy Practice Department, Faculty of Pharmacy King Abdulaziz University Jeddah Saudi Arabia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Amer M, Maghrabi K, Bawazeer M, Alshaikh K, Shaban M, Rizwan M, Amin R, De Vol E, Baali M, Altewerki M, Bano M, Alkhaldi F, Alenazi S, Hijazi M. Adjunctive ketamine for sedation in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients: an active-controlled, pilot, feasibility clinical trial. J Intensive Care 2021; 9:54. [PMID: 34462007 PMCID: PMC8404029 DOI: 10.1186/s40560-021-00569-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2021] [Accepted: 08/25/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Ketamine has been shown to decrease sedative requirements in intensive care unit (ICU). Randomized trials are limited on patient-centered outcomes. We designed this pilot trial to evaluate the feasibility of a large randomized controlled trial (RCT) testing the effect of ketamine as an adjunct analgosedative compared with standard of care alone as a control group (CG) in critically ill patients with mechanical ventilation (MV). We also provided preliminary evidence on clinically relevant outcomes to plan a larger trial. MATERIAL AND METHODS Pilot, active-controlled, open-label RCT was conducted at medical, surgical, and transplant ICUs at a large tertiary and quaternary care medical institution (King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Saudi Arabia). The study included adult patients who were intubated within 24 h, expected to require MV for the next calendar day, and had institutional pain and sedation protocol initiated. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to adjunct ketamine infusion 1-2 μg/kg/min for 48 h or CG alone. RESULTS Of 437 patients screened from September 2019 through November 2020, 83 (18.9%) patients were included (43 in CG and 40 in ketamine) and 352 (80.5%) were excluded. Average enrollment rate was 3-4 patients/month. Consent and protocol adherence rates were adequate (89.24% and 76%, respectively). Demographics were balanced between groups. Median MV duration was 7 (interquartile range [IQR] 3-9.25 days) in ketamine and 5 (IQR 2-8 days) in CG. Median VFDs was 19 (IQR 0-24.75 days) in ketamine and 19 (IQR 0-24 days) in the CG (p = 0.70). More patients attained goal Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale at 24 and 48 h in ketamine (67.5% and 73.5%, respectively) compared with CG (52.4% and 66.7%, respectively). Sedatives and vasopressors cumulative use, and hemodynamic changes were similar. ICU length-of-stay was 12.5 (IQR 6-21.2 days) in ketamine, compared with 12 (IQR 5.5-23 days) in CG. No serious adverse events were observed in either group. CONCLUSIONS Ketamine as an adjunct analgosedative agent appeared to be feasible and safe with no negative impact on outcomes, including hemodynamics. This pilot RCT identified areas of improvement in study protocol before conducting a large, adequately powered, multicenter RCT which is likely justified to investigate ketamine association with patient-centered outcomes further. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04075006. Registered on 30 August 2019. Current controlled trials: ISRCTN14730035. Registered on 3 February 2020.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marwa Amer
- Pharmaceutical Care Division, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, (MBC # 11), PO Box 3354, Riyadh, 11211, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. .,College of Medicine, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
| | - Khalid Maghrabi
- College of Medicine, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.,Department of Critical Care Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Mohammed Bawazeer
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Kamel Alshaikh
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Mohammad Shaban
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Muhammad Rizwan
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Rashid Amin
- Pharmaceutical Care Division, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, (MBC # 11), PO Box 3354, Riyadh, 11211, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
| | - Edward De Vol
- Biostatistics, Epidemiology & Scientific Computing Department, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Mawadah Baali
- Biostatistics, Epidemiology & Scientific Computing Department, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Malak Altewerki
- Department of Neurosciences, Residency Training Program, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Mehreen Bano
- Departments of Nursing, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Fawziah Alkhaldi
- Departments of Nursing, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Sanaa Alenazi
- Departments of Nursing, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Mohammed Hijazi
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
The Nexus Between Sleep Disturbance and Delirium Among Intensive Care Patients. Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am 2021; 33:155-171. [PMID: 34023083 DOI: 10.1016/j.cnc.2021.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Sleep in intensive care is hampered due to many factors; the clinical environment itself exacerbates sleep disturbance. Research suggests that interventions aimed at improving sleep quality have produced positive effects in reducing incidences and duration of delirium. Sleep disturbance is well documented among intensive care patients; however, its prognostic impact is not fully understood. Delirium, disproportionally prevalent among intensive care patients, has significant prognostic factors related to patient outcomes, in which sleep disturbance often is present. The relationship between sleep disturbance and delirium is complex, sharing commonalities in relation to neurobiological and neurohormonal alterations, which may contribute to a bidirectional relationship.
Collapse
|