Oral melatonin in high-risk critically ill patients: quality of sedative effect
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Sabbatini G
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3363740 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Although potent sedative and opioid drugs are some of the most commonly used medications to manage pain, anxiety, and discomfort in critically ill patients, conducting clinical trials where sedative and opioid medications are outcome variables within a longitudinal research design can be a methodological challenge. OBJECTIVES:The purpose of this article is to provide in detail a conceptual discussion of the concept and analysis of sedative exposure: A novel research analysis method for aggregating sedative and opioid medication doses from disparate drug classes commonly administered to critically ill patients and used by our team in several clinical research studies. METHODS:Comparing the dose of each sedative and opioid administered to an individual patient (within a defined time interval) to all other patients in a research study receiving the same medications allows for ranking of dosages for each medication by quartiles. Rank values for all sedatives and opioids received can be summed to a single value resulting in a Sedation Intensity Score. In addition, a simple count of how many hours at least one dose of a sedative or opioid medication has been administered can determine sedation frequency. RESULTS:This method can allow for comparison of sedative exposure with medications from disparate drug classes and for analysis of estimates of change in medication use over time. DISCUSSION:This novel research analysis method can overcome the challenges and limitations of determining changes in sedative and opioid medication regimens in cohort and clinical trial study designs.
| S-EPMC6293984 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIatrogenic withdrawal syndrome, after exposure medication known to cause withdrawal is recognised, yet under described in adult intensive care.AimTo investigate, opioid, sedation, and preadmission medication practice in critically ill adults with focus on aspects associated with iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome.MethodOne-day point prevalence study in UK intensive care units (ICUs). We collected ICU admission medication and/or substances with withdrawal potential, sedation policy, opioid and sedative use, dose, and duration.ResultsThirty-seven from 39 participating ICUs contributed data from 386 patients. The prevalence rate for parenteral opioid and sedative medication was 56.1% (212 patients). Twenty-three ICUs (59%) had no sedation/analgesia policy, and no ICUs screened for iatrogenic withdrawal. Patient admission medications with withdrawal-potential included antidepressants or antipsychotics (43, 20.3%) and nicotine (41, 19.3%). Of 212 patients, 202 (95.3%) received opioids, 163 (76.9%) sedatives and 153 (72.2%) both. Two hundred and two (95.3%) patients received opioids: 167 (82.7%) by continuous infusions and 90 (44.6%) patients for longer than 96-h. One hundred and sixty-three (76.9%) patients received sedatives: 157 (77.7%) by continuous infusions and 74 (45.4%) patients for longer than 96-h.ConclusionOpioid sedative and admission medication with iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome potential prevalence rates were high, and a high proportion of ICUs had no sedative/analgesic policies. Nearly half of patients received continuous opioids and sedatives for longer than 96-h placing them at high risk of iatrogenic withdrawal. No participating unit reported using a validated tool for iatrogenic withdrawal assessment.
| S-EPMC10600273 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Critically ill patients have abnormal circadian and sleep homeostasis. This may be associated with higher morbidity and mortality. The aims of this pilot study were (1) to describe melatonin secretion in conscious critically ill mechanically ventilated patients and (2) to describe whether melatonin secretion and sleep patterns differed in these patients with and without remifentanil infusion. Eight patients were included. Blood-melatonin was taken every 4th hour, and polysomnography was carried out continually during a 48-hour period. American Academy of Sleep Medicine criteria were used for sleep scoring if sleep patterns were identified; otherwise, Watson's classification was applied. As remifentanil was periodically administered during the study, its effect on melatonin and sleep was assessed. Melatonin secretion in these patients followed a phase-delayed diurnal curve. We did not observe any effect of remifentanil on melatonin secretion. We found that the risk of atypical sleep compared to normal sleep was significantly lower (p < 0.001) under remifentanil infusion. Rapid Eye Movement (REM) sleep was only observed during the nonsedation period. We found preserved diurnal pattern of melatonin secretion in these patients. Remifentanil did not affect melatonin secretion but was associated with lower risk of atypical sleep pattern. REM sleep was only registered during the period of nonsedation.
| S-EPMC5443994 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPolypharmacy of sedatives (PP) is a potentially modifiable, iatrogenic risk factor for ICU delirium. The extent to which sedative PP influenced development of high rates of delirium among critically ill COVID-19 patients is unknown. We tested the hypothesis that PP, defined as the use of four or more classes of intravenous agents, is a mediator in the causal pathway of mechanical ventilation and delirium.MethodsRetrospective cohort study of adults admitted with a primary diagnosis of RT-PCR+ for SARS-CoV2 to ICUs of a tertiary-level academic medical center between February 2020 and April 2021. Mediation analysis was conducted with bootstrap estimation to assess whether an association between mechanical ventilation and delirium was mediated by PP. Analyses were adjusted for potential confounders related to mechanical ventilation, mediator, and outcome, including age, gender, vasopressor use, median RASS scores, SOFA score within 24 h of admission, and maximum CRP levels.ResultsA total of 212 patients were included in the analysis. Of total patients, 72.6%(154/212) of patients had delirium (CAM-ICU+) during ICU stay. 54.7%(116/212) patients received PP. Mechanical ventilation (OR 3.81 [1.16-12.52]) and PP (OR 7.38 [2.4-22.68]) were identified as risk factors for development of ICU delirium after adjusting for prespecified confounders. PP acts as a mediator in the causal pathway between mechanical ventilation and delirium. 39% (95% CI: 17%-94%) of the effect of mechanical ventilation on delirium was mediated through PP.ConclusionPP mediates approximately 39% of the effect of mechanical ventilation on delirium, which is clinically and statistically significant. Studies should assess whether mitigating PP could lead to reduction in ICU delirium.Implication statementPP of sedatives (defined as use of four or more intravenous agents) mediates approximately 39% of the effect of mechanical ventilation on development of ICU delirium. Avoidance of sedative PP may represent a viable strategy for reduction of ICU delirium.
| S-EPMC9353360 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Daily sedative interruption and intermittent sedation are effective in abbreviating the time on mechanical ventilation. Whether one is superior to the other has not yet been determined. Our aim was to compare daily interruption and intermittent sedation during the mechanical ventilation period in a low nurse staffing ICU. METHODS:Adult patients expected to need mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours were randomly assigned, in a single center, either to daily interruption of continuous sedative and opioid infusion or to intermittent sedation. In both cases, our goal was to maintain a Sedation Agitation Scale (SAS) level of 3 or 4; that is patients should be calm, easily arousable or awakened with verbal stimuli or gentle shaking. Primary outcome was ventilator-free days in 28 days. Secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital mortality, incidence of delirium, nurse workload, self-extubation and psychological distress six months after ICU discharge. RESULTS:A total of 60 patients were included. There were no differences in the ventilator-free days in 28 days between daily interruption and intermittent sedation (median: 24 versus 25 days, P?=?0.160). There were also no differences in ICU mortality (40 versus 23.3%, P?=?0.165), hospital mortality (43.3 versus 30%, P?=?0.284), incidence of delirium (30 versus 40%, P?=?0.472), self-extubation (3.3 versus 6.7%, P?=?0.514), and psychological stress six months after ICU discharge. Also, the nurse workload was not different between groups, but it was reduced on day 5 compared to day 1 in both groups (Nurse Activity Score (NAS) in the intermittent sedation group was 54 on day 1 versus 39 on day 5, P?<?0.001; NAS in daily interruption group was 53 on day 1 versus 38 on day 5, P?<?0.001). Fentanyl and midazolam total dosages per patient were higher in the daily interruption group. The tidal volume was higher in the intermittent sedation group during the first five days of ICU stay. CONCLUSIONS:There was no difference in the number of ventilator-free days in 28 days between both groups. Intermittent sedation was associated with lower sedative and opioid doses. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00824239.
| S-EPMC4026117 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this study, the aim was to test the biochemical effects of melatonin supplementation in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients, since their blood levels are decreased. Sixty-four patients were enrolled in the study. From the evening of the 3rd ICU day, patients were randomized to receive oral melatonin (3 mg, group M) or placebo (group P) twice daily, at 20:00 and 24:00, until discharged. Blood was taken (at 00:00 and 14:00), on the 3rd ICU day to assess basal nocturnal melatonin values, and then during the treatment period on the 4th and 8th ICU days. Melatonin, total antioxidant capacity, and oxidative stress were evaluated in serum. Melatonin circadian rhythm before treatment was similar in the two groups, with a partial preservation of the cycle. Four hours from the 1st administration (4th ICU day, 00:00), melatonin levels increased to 2514 (982.3; 7148) pg·mL-1 in group M vs. 20.3 (14.7; 62.3) pg·mL-1 in group P (p < 0.001). After five treatment days (8th ICU day), melatonin absorption showed a repetitive trend in group M, while in group P nocturnal secretion (00:00) was impaired: 20 (11.5; 34.5) pg·mL-1 vs. 33.8 (25.0; 62.2) on the 3rd day (p = 0.029). Immediately from the beginning of treatment, the total antioxidant capacity was significantly higher in melatonin treated subjects at 00:00; a significant correlation was found between total antioxidant capacity and blood melatonin values (ρ = 0.328; p < 0.001). The proposed enteral administration protocol was adequate, even in the early phase, to enhance melatonin blood levels and to protect the patients from oxidative stress. The antioxidant effect of melatonin could play a meaningful role in the care and well-being of these patients.
| S-EPMC5412344 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate the impact of obesity on the use of analgesics and sedatives, rates of iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome (IWS), and outcomes in mechanically ventilated pediatric patients. Additionally, it sought to assess whether a nurse-implemented sedation protocol would be equally effective for children with and without obesity.DesignSecondary analysis of the Randomized Evaluation of Sedation Titration for Respiratory Failure (RESTORE) pediatric multicenter clinical trial.SettingThirty-one U.S. PICUs.PatientsChildren 1-17 years old, categorized as with or without obesity according to World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsThe study assessed various factors including medication exposure, adequacy of pain and sedation management, IWS rates, and clinical outcomes. Obesity occurred in 22% of patients. Obesity did not influence choice of opiate, but it led to extended exposure to these medications. There were no differences in dosing per kilogram of admission weight, resulting in significantly higher daily and cumulative doses in those with obesity. In the protocolized sedation arm, patients with obesity received significantly higher median opiate doses compared with the nonobesity protocolized sedation group. IWS rates did not differ; however, protocolized sedation obesity patients experienced more instances of inadequate sedation, longer time to extubation readiness, longer duration of mechanical ventilation and PICU stay, and higher 28-day in-hospital mortality than the protocolized sedation nonobesity group. These weight-based differences were not noted in the usual care arm.ConclusionsThis study underscores the significance of accounting for body habitus when selecting and dosing opiates in children with acute respiratory failure. Obesity had substantial impact on medication exposure and clinical outcomes, particularly within a structured, protocolized sedation regimen. Further research is warranted to explore the intricate relationship between medication dosing and clinical outcomes in children with obesity.
| S-EPMC11813009 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Delirium is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We implemented a delirium prevention policy in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with a high risk of developing delirium, and evaluated if our policy resulted in quality improvement of relevant delirium outcome measures.This study was a before/after evaluation of a delirium prevention project using prophylactic treatment with haloperidol. Patients with a predicted risk for delirium of ? 50%, or with a history of alcohol abuse or dementia, were identified. According to the prevention protocol these patients received haloperidol 1 mg/8 h. Evaluation was primarily focused on delirium incidence, delirium free days without coma and 28-day mortality. Results of prophylactic treatment were compared with a historical control group and a contemporary group that did not receive haloperidol prophylaxis mainly due to non-compliance to the protocol mostly during the implementation phase.In 12 months, 177 patients received haloperidol prophylaxis. Except for sepsis, patient characteristics were comparable between the prevention and the historical (n = 299) groups. Predicted chance to develop delirium was 75 ± 19% and 73 ± 22%, respectively. Haloperidol prophylaxis resulted in a lower delirium incidence (65% vs. 75%, P = 0.01), and more delirium-free-days (median 20 days (IQR 8 to 27) vs. median 13 days (3 to 27), P = 0.003) in the intervention group compared to the control group. Cox-regression analysis adjusted for sepsis showed a hazard rate of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.98) for 28-day mortality. Beneficial effects of haloperidol appeared most pronounced in the patients with the highest risk for delirium. Furthermore, haloperidol prophylaxis resulted in less ICU re-admissions (11% vs. 18%, P = 0.03) and unplanned removal of tubes/lines (12% vs. 19%, P = 0.02). Haloperidol was stopped in 12 patients because of QTc-time prolongation (n = 9), renal failure (n = 1) or suspected neurological side-effects (n = 2). No other side-effects were reported. Patients who were not treated during the intervention period (n = 59) showed similar results compared to the untreated historical control group.Our evaluation study suggests that prophylactic treatment with low dose haloperidol in critically ill patients with a high risk for delirium probably has beneficial effects. These results warrant confirmation in a randomized controlled trial.clinicaltrial.gov Identifier: NCT01187667.
| S-EPMC4056261 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThe prolonged use of benzodiazepines and opioids can lead to an increase in the incidence of withdrawal syndrome. One of the known risk factors is the lack of a sedative-weaning protocol. This study established a sedative-weaning protocol and compared this protocol with the usual care of weaning in high-risk critically ill children.Materials and methodsThis was an open-label, randomized controlled trial in a tertiary-care hospital. We recruited children aged 1 month to 18 years who had received intravenous sedative or analgesic drugs for at least 5 days. The exclusion criteria were patients who had already experienced the withdrawal syndrome. We established a weaning protocol. Eligible patients were randomly divided into the protocolized (intervention) and usual care (control) groups. The primary objective was to determine the prevalence of the withdrawal syndrome compared between two groups.ResultsThirty eligible patients were enrolled (19 in the intervention and 11 in the control group). Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between both the groups. The prevalence of the withdrawal syndrome was 84% and 81% of patients in the intervention and control group, respectively. The duration of the initial weaning phase was shorter in the intervention group than in the control group (p value = 0.026). The cumulative dose of morphine solution for rescue therapy in the intervention group was statistically lower than that in the control group (p value = 0.016).ConclusionThe implementation of the sedative-weaning protocol led to a significant reduction in the percentage of withdrawal days and length of intensive care unit stay without any adverse drug reactions. External validation would be needed to validate this protocol.Clinicaltrialsgov identifierNCT03018977.How to cite this articleTiacharoen D, Lertbunrian R, Veawpanich J, Suppalarkbunlue N, Anantasit N. Protocolized Sedative Weaning vs Usual Care in Pediatric Critically Ill Patients: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(6):451-458.
| S-EPMC7435087 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe effect of dexmedetomidine on length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay and time to extubation is still unclear.Materials and methodsPertinent studies were independently searched in BioMedCentral, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials (updated February first 2013). Randomized studies (dexmedetomidine versus any comparator) were included if including patients mechanically ventilated in an intensive care unit (ICU). Co-primary endpoints were the length of ICU stay (days) and time to extubation (hours). Secondary endpoint was mortality rate at the longest follow-up available.ResultsThe 27 included manuscripts (28 trials) randomized 3,648 patients (1,870 to dexmedetomidine and 1,778 to control). Overall analysis showed that the use of dexmedetomidine was associated with a significant reduction in length of ICU stay (weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.79 [-1.17 to -0.40] days, p for effect <0.001) and of time to extubation (WMD = -2.74 [-3.80 to -1.65] hours, p for effect <0.001). Mortality was not different between dexmedetomidine and controls (risk ratio = 1.00 [0.84 to 1.21], p for effect = 0.9). High heterogeneity between included studies was found.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies suggests that dexmedetomidine could help to reduce ICU stay and time to extubation, in critically ill patients even if high heterogeneity between studies might confound the interpretation of these results.
| S-EPMC3877008 | biostudies-literature