Impact of healthcare system strain on the implementation of ICU sedation practices and encephalopathy burden during the early COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems worldwide, particularly in managing critically ill patients requiring mechanical ventilation early in the pandemic. Surging patient volumes strained hospital resources and complicated the implementation of standard-of-care intensive care unit (ICU) practices, including sedation management. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of an evidence-based ICU sedation bundle during the early COVID-19 pandemic. The bundle was designed by a multi-disciplinary collaborative to reinforce best clinical practices related to ICU sedation. The bundle was implemented prospectively with retrospective analysis of electronic medical record data. The setting was the ICUs of a single-center tertiary hospital. The patients were the ICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation for confirmed COVID-19 between March and June 2020. A learning health collaborative developed a sedation bundle encouraging goal-directed sedation and use of adjunctive strategies to avoid excessive sedative administration. Implementation strategies included structured in-service training, audit and feedback, and continuous improvement. Sedative utilization and clinical outcomes were compared between patients admitted before and after the sedation bundle implementation. Quasi-experimental interrupted time-series analyses of pre and post intervention sedative utilization, hospital length of stay, and number of days free of delirium, coma, or death in 21 days (as a quantitative measure of encephalopathy burden). The analysis used the time duration between start of the COVID-19 wave and ICU admission to identify a "breakpoint" indicating a change in observed trends. A total of 183 patients (age 59.0 ± 15.9 years) were included, with 83 (45%) admitted before the intervention began. Benzodiazepine utilization increased for patients admitted after the bundle implementation, while agents intended to reduce benzodiazepine use showed no greater utilization. No "breakpoint" was identified to suggest the bundle impacted any endpoint measure. However, increasing time between COVID-19 wave start and ICU admission was associated with fewer delirium, coma, and death-free days (β =  - 0.044 [95% CI - 0.085, - 0.003] days/wave day); more days of benzodiazepine infusion (β = 0.056 [95% CI 0.025, 0.088] days/wave day); and a higher maximum benzodiazepine infusion rate (β = 0.079 [95% CI 0.037, 0.120] mg/h/wave day). The evidence-based practice bundle did not significantly alter sedation utilization patterns during the first COVID-19 wave. Sedation practices deteriorated and encephalopathy burden increased over time, highlighting that strategies to reinforce clinical practices may be hindered under conditions of extreme healthcare system strain.

Successful management of suspected propofol dependence with phenobarbital in an adult patient with COVID-19

PURPOSE

In critically ill patients, high sedation requirements for prolonged durations are often needed to achieve ventilator synchrony, a practice that was particularly common during the early stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We report the successful use of phenobarbital to facilitate propofol weaning after prolonged medication exposure.

SUMMARY

A 64-year-old male with hypertension was admitted for the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome due to COVID-19 pneumonia. The patient received high doses of fentanyl and propofol with periods of concomitant midazolam and dexmedetomidine throughout his prolonged time on mechanical ventilation. Total days of exposure were 19 for fentanyl, 17 for propofol, 12 for midazolam, and 15 for dexmedetomidine. Upon improvement in lung function, attempts to wean the patient from propofol all failed due to symptoms such as tachypnea, tachycardia, and hypertension, with symptom resolution only upon return to the previous dose. Phenobarbital was trialed for possible propofol withdrawal syndrome, allowing for a dose reduction of 10 μg/kg/min within 2 hours of the first dose without any corresponding symptoms. The patient continued to receive intermittent doses of phenobarbital for another 36 hours until propofol was discontinued. He underwent tracheostomy shortly after weaning off all sedation and was discharged to rehab 34 days after his initial admission.

CONCLUSION

Information concerning propofol withdrawal syndrome in the literature is limited. Our experience demonstrates the successful use of phenobarbital to facilitate propofol weaning after prolonged exposure.

Supportive Management and Interventions for Respiratory Failure Due to SARS-CoV-2

Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can vary from asymptomatic to severe symptoms. It can lead to respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring intubation and mechanical ventilation. Triaging patients is key to prevent spread, conserving medical resources, and providing appropriate care. The treatment of these patients remains supportive. Respiratory failure due to the virus should be managed by providing supplemental oxygen and early intubation. Some patients develop acute respiratory distress syndrome and refractory hypoxemia. In this article, we review the 2 phenotypes of respiratory failure, mechanical ventilation and the management of refractory hypoxemia.

Sedation, Analgesia, and Paralysis in COVID-19 Patients in the Setting of Drug Shortages

The rapid spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to a global pandemic. The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) presents with a spectrum of symptoms ranging from mild to critical illness requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Acute respiratory distress syndrome is a major complication in patients with severe COVID-19 disease. Currently, there are no recognized pharmacological therapies for COVID-19. However, a large number of COVID-19 patients require respiratory support, with a high percentage requiring invasive ventilation. The rapid spread of the infection has led to a surge in the rate of hospitalizations and ICU admissions, which created a challenge to public health, research, and medical communities. The high demand for several therapies, including sedatives, analgesics, and paralytics, that are often utilized in the care of COVID-19 patients requiring mechanical ventilation, has created pressure on the supply chain resulting in shortages in these critical medications. This has led clinicians to develop conservation strategies and explore alternative therapies for sedation, analgesia, and paralysis in COVID-19 patients. Several of these alternative approaches have demonstrated acceptable levels of sedation, analgesia, and paralysis in different settings but they are not commonly used in the ICU. Additionally, they have unique pharmaceutical properties, limitations, and adverse effects. This narrative review summarizes the literature on alternative drug therapies for the management of sedation, analgesia, and paralysis in COVID-19 patients. Also, this document serves as a resource for clinicians in current and future respiratory illness pandemics in the setting of drug shortages.

An Analysis of Psychoactive Medications Initiated in the ICU but Continued Beyond Discharge: A Pilot Study of Stewardship

BACKGROUND

Psychoactive medications (PM) are frequently administered in the intensive care unit (ICU) to provide comfort. Interventions focused on preventing their continuation after the acute phase of illness are needed.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency that patients with ICU-initiated PM are continued upon ICU and hospital discharge.

METHODS

This single-center, prospective, observational study assessed consecutive adult ICU patients who received scheduled PM. Frequency of PM continued at ICU and hospital discharge was recorded. The patient's primary treatment team was contacted by the pharmacist within 72 hours of ICU discharge to establish rationale for continued use or to suggest discontinuation.

RESULTS

Of the 60 patients included, 72% were continued on PM at ICU discharge and 30% at hospital discharge. The pharmacist contacted 40% of treatment teams after ICU discharge and intervention resulted in PM discontinued in 50% of patients. Post ICU discharge, the indication of 41% of patients' PM was unknown by the non-ICU care team or incorrect. Medical ICU patients or those transferred to an outside facility were more likely remain on PM at hospital discharge.

CONCLUSION

PM are frequently continued during transitions of care and often without knowledge of the initial indication. Future studies should establish effective PM stewardship methods.

Repurposing Valproate, Enteral Clonidine, and Phenobarbital for Comfort in Adult ICU Patients: A Literature Review with Practical Considerations

Provision of adequate sedation is a fundamental part of caring for critically ill patients. Propofol, dexmedetomidine, and benzodiazepines are the most commonly administered sedative medications for adult patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). These agents are limited by adverse effects, need for a monitored environment for safe administration, and lack of universal effectiveness. Increased interest has recently been expressed about repurposing older pharmacologic agents for patient comfort in the ICU. Valproate, enteral clonidine, and phenobarbital are three agents with increasing evidence supporting their use. Potential benefits associated with their utilization are cost minimization and safe administration after transition out of the ICU. This literature review describes the historical context, pharmacologic characteristics, supportive data, and practical considerations associated with the administration of these agents for comfort in critically ill adult patients.

Valproate for agitation in critically ill patients: A retrospective study

PURPOSE

The purpose was to describe the use of valproate therapy for agitation in critically ill patients, examine its safety, and describe its relationship with agitation and delirium.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study evaluated critically ill adults treated with valproate for agitation from December 2012 through February 2015. Information on valproate prescribing practices and safety was collected. Incidence of agitation, delirium, and concomitant psychoactive medication use was compared between valproate day 1 and valproate day 3. Concomitant psychoactive medication use was analyzed using mixed models.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients were evaluated. The median day of valproate therapy initiation was ICU day 7, and it was continued for a median of 7 days. The median maintenance dose was 1500 mg/d (23 mg/kg/d). The incidence of agitation (96% vs 61%, P < .0001) and delirium (68% vs 49%, P = .012) significantly decreased by valproate day 3. Treatment with opioids (77% vs 65%, P = .02) and dexmedetomidine (47% vs 24%, P = .004) also decreased. In mixed models analyses, valproate therapy was associated with reduced fentanyl equivalents (-185 μg/d, P = .0003) and lorazepam equivalents (-2.1 mg/d, P = .0004). Hyperammonemia (19%) and thrombocytopenia (13%) were the most commonly observed adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Valproate therapy was associated with a reduction in agitation, delirium, and concomitant psychoactive medication use within 48 hours of initiation.