Dexmedetomidine: Toward a paradigm shift in ICU sedation

Clinical Practice Guidelines and Consensus Statements About Pain Management in Critically Ill End-of-Life Patients: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To identify and synthesize available recommendations from scientific societies and experts on pain management at the end-of-life in the ICU.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted a systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Biblioteca Virtual en Salud from their inception until March 28, 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

We included all clinical practice guidelines, consensus statements, and benchmarks for quality.

DATA EXTRACTION

Study selection, methodological quality, and data extraction were performed independently by two investigators. A quality assessment was performed by four investigators using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. The recommendations were then synthesized and categorized.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Ten publications were included. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II statement showed low scores in various quality domains, especially in the applicability and rigor of development. Most documents were in agreement on five topics: 1) using a quantitative tool for pain assessment; 2) administering narcotics for pain relief and benzodiazepines for anxiety relief; 3) against prescribing neuromuscular blockers during withdrawal of life support to assess pain; 4) endorsing the use of high doses of opioids and sedatives for pain control, regardless of the risk that they will hasten death; and 5) using quality indicators to improve pain management during end-of-life in the ICU.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of the lack of high-quality evidence, recommendations for pain management at the end-of-life in the ICU are homogeneous and are justified by ethical principles and agreement among experts. Considering the growing demand for the involvement of palliative care teams in the management of the dying patients in the ICU, there is a need to clearly define their early involvement and to further develop comprehensive evidence-based pain management strategies. Based on the study findings, we propose a management algorithm to improve the overall care of dying critically ill patients.

End-of-Life Care: Consensus Statement by Indian Academy of Pediatrics

JUSTIFICATION

The right to life has been accepted as one of the fundamental rights in our constitution. Resuscitation is a procedure performed for all patients suffering from cardiac or respiratory arrest irrespective of the clinical condition. There are no legal guidelines defining process to be adopted in situations where resuscitation is unlikely to be useful. There are no guidelines on withdrawal of care or end of life (EOL) decisions, accepted by the Government, judiciary, professionals, academicians or the community.

Process

A National Consultative meet was organized by Indian Medico-Legal and Ethics Association and the Medico-legal group of Indian Academy of Pediatrics (IAP) to formulate the guidelines on 'Do Not Resuscitate' (DNR), and 'End of Life Support'. The meeting was organized on 30th May, 2014 at Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, New Delhi. The meeting involved professionals from legal and various medical fields as well as administrators, and members from Medical Council of India.

OBJECTIVES

To frame the guidelines related to EOL care issues and withdrawal or with-holding treatment in situations where outcome of continued treatment is expected to be poor in terms of ultimate survival or quality of life.

RECOMMENDATIONS

(i) DNR or end of life care should not be activated till consensus is achieved between treating team and the next of kin; (ii) Consensus within health care team (including nurses) needs to be achieved before discussion with family members; (iii) Discussion should involve the family members - next of kin and other persons who can influence decisions; (iv) If family members want to include their family physician or a prominent person from the community, it should be encouraged. Similarly if family members want a particular member of treating team, he/she should be included; (v) Treating doctors should have all the facts of the case including investigations available with them before discussion; (vi) Unit in-charge or treating doctor should be responsible for achieving consensus and should initiate the discussion; (vii) After presenting the facts of the cases, family members should be encouraged to ask questions and clear doubts (if any); (viii) At the end of discussion, a summary of the discussion should be prepared and signed by the next of kin and the unit in-charge or treating doctors; (ix) DNR orders should be reviewed in the event of unexpected improvement or on request of next of kin. Same should be documented; (x) DNR orders remain valid during transport.

Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam for Sedation in Mechanically Ventilated Patients Guided by Bispectral Index and Sedation-Agitation Scale

Background:

Mechanical ventilation and sedation are inextricably linked components of critical care that represent, what we do for the patients during their vulnerable course in Intensive Care Unit (ICU).

Aims:

The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of midazolam and dexmedetomidine in patients on mechanical ventilator with the help of Bispectral Index (BIS) monitoring and correlation of BIS with Sedation-Agitation Scale (SAS).

Settings and Design:

Prospective, observational, and comparative study.

Materials and Methods:

In this study, recruited patients were allocated into two groups of 14 patients each. Group A and Group B patients received injection dexmedetomidine and injection Midazolam, respectively. Hemodynamic parameters, time of extubation, duration of mechanical ventilation, and mortality were compared between two groups.

Statistical Analysis:

Mean and the standard deviation were calculated. Test of analysis between two groups was performed using unpaired t-test. We applied correlation technique, that is, Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (r) to assess the correlation between BIS and SAS. It varies from + 1–0 to −1.

Results:

Heart rate and blood pressure were more stable and less in Group A than Group B. Duration of mechanical ventilation was found extremely significant between Group A (77.86 ± 5.71 h) and Group B (95.64 ± 17.00 h) (P = 0.001). There was significant difference found in the time of extubation between Group A (21 ± 6.44 h) and Group B (30.4 ± 10.62 h) P = 0.008.

Conclusion:

It is concluded in this study that sedation with dexmedetomidine resulted in quick extubation and decreased the duration of mechanical ventilation in comparison to midazolam in ICU patients. There was found moderate to high correlation between BIS index and SAS.