Recommended dosages of analgesic and sedative drugs in intensive care result in a low incidence of potentially toxic blood concentrations

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
U. Lennborn, A. Johansson, Erik Lindgren, Elisabet I. Nielsen, Håkan Sandler, Maria Bertilsson, R. Kronstrand, Johan Ahlner, F. Kugelberg, Sten Rubertsson
{"title":"Recommended dosages of analgesic and sedative drugs in intensive care result in a low incidence of potentially toxic blood concentrations","authors":"U. Lennborn, A. Johansson, Erik Lindgren, Elisabet I. Nielsen, Håkan Sandler, Maria Bertilsson, R. Kronstrand, Johan Ahlner, F. Kugelberg, Sten Rubertsson","doi":"10.48101/ujms.v129.10560","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Standard dosages of analgesic and sedative drugs are given to intensive care patients. The resulting range of blood concentrations and corresponding clinical responses need to be better examined. The purpose of this study was to describe daily dosages, measured blood concentrations, and clinical responses in critically ill patients. The purpose was also to contribute to establishing whole blood concentration reference values of the drugs investigated. \nMethods: A descriptive study of prospectively collected data from 302 admissions to a general intensive care unit (ICU) at a university hospital. Ten drugs (clonidine, fentanyl, morphine, dexmedetomidine, ketamine, ketobemidone, midazolam, paracetamol, propofol, and thiopental) were investigated, and daily dosages recorded. Blood samples were collected twice daily, and drug concentrations were measured. Clinical responses were registered using Richmond agitation-sedation scale (RASS) and Numeric rating scale (NRS). \nResults: Drug dosages were within recommended dose ranges. Blood concentrations for all 10 drugs showed a wide variation within the cohort, but only 3% were above therapeutic interval where clonidine (57 of 122) and midazolam (38 of 122) dominated. RASS and NRS were not correlated to drug concentrations. \nConclusion: Using recommended dose intervals for analgesic and sedative drugs in the ICU setting combined with regular monitoring of clinical responses such as RASS and NRS leads to 97% of concentrations being below the upper limit in the therapeutic interval. This study contributes to whole blood drug concentration reference values regarding these 10 drugs.","PeriodicalId":23458,"journal":{"name":"Upsala journal of medical sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Upsala journal of medical sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.48101/ujms.v129.10560","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Standard dosages of analgesic and sedative drugs are given to intensive care patients. The resulting range of blood concentrations and corresponding clinical responses need to be better examined. The purpose of this study was to describe daily dosages, measured blood concentrations, and clinical responses in critically ill patients. The purpose was also to contribute to establishing whole blood concentration reference values of the drugs investigated. Methods: A descriptive study of prospectively collected data from 302 admissions to a general intensive care unit (ICU) at a university hospital. Ten drugs (clonidine, fentanyl, morphine, dexmedetomidine, ketamine, ketobemidone, midazolam, paracetamol, propofol, and thiopental) were investigated, and daily dosages recorded. Blood samples were collected twice daily, and drug concentrations were measured. Clinical responses were registered using Richmond agitation-sedation scale (RASS) and Numeric rating scale (NRS). Results: Drug dosages were within recommended dose ranges. Blood concentrations for all 10 drugs showed a wide variation within the cohort, but only 3% were above therapeutic interval where clonidine (57 of 122) and midazolam (38 of 122) dominated. RASS and NRS were not correlated to drug concentrations. Conclusion: Using recommended dose intervals for analgesic and sedative drugs in the ICU setting combined with regular monitoring of clinical responses such as RASS and NRS leads to 97% of concentrations being below the upper limit in the therapeutic interval. This study contributes to whole blood drug concentration reference values regarding these 10 drugs.
重症监护中镇痛和镇静药物的推荐剂量导致血液中潜在毒性浓度的发生率较低
背景:重症监护病人服用标准剂量的镇痛和镇静药物。由此产生的血药浓度范围和相应的临床反应需要更好地研究。本研究的目的是描述重症患者的每日用药量、测得的血药浓度和临床反应。目的还在于为建立所研究药物的全血浓度参考值做出贡献。研究方法对某大学附属医院普通重症监护室(ICU)收治的 302 名住院病人的前瞻性数据进行描述性研究。研究了十种药物(氯尼丁、芬太尼、吗啡、右美托咪定、氯胺酮、酮贝米酮、咪达唑仑、扑热息痛、异丙酚和硫喷妥),并记录了每日用量。每天收集两次血样,测量药物浓度。使用里士满躁动镇静量表(RASS)和数字评分量表(NRS)记录临床反应。研究结果药物剂量均在推荐剂量范围内。队列中所有 10 种药物的血药浓度差异很大,但只有 3% 的药物高于治疗间隔,其中以氯苯胍(122 例中有 57 例)和咪达唑仑(122 例中有 38 例)为主。RASS 和 NRS 与药物浓度无关。结论在重症监护室环境中使用镇痛和镇静药物的推荐剂量间隔,并定期监测 RASS 和 NRS 等临床反应,可使 97% 的药物浓度低于治疗间隔的上限。这项研究为这 10 种药物的全血药物浓度参考值做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Upsala journal of medical sciences
Upsala journal of medical sciences 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences is published for the Upsala Medical Society. It has been published since 1865 and is one of the oldest medical journals in Sweden. The journal publishes clinical and experimental original works in the medical field. Although focusing on regional issues, the journal always welcomes contributions from outside Sweden. Specially extended issues are published occasionally, dealing with special topics, congress proceedings and academic dissertations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信