Analgesia, sedation, and neuromuscular blocking agents: A standardized protocol of analgosedation in COVID-19.

Cecilia Inés Loudet, Marisol García Sarubbio, María Julia Meschini, Jacqueline Vilca Becerra, María Agustina Mazzoleni, Vanesa Aramendi, Agustina Barbieri, Carolina Colavita, Gustavo Cerri, Sofía Pacho, Eliseo Hernán Ferrari, Rosa Reina
{"title":"Analgesia, sedation, and neuromuscular blocking agents: A standardized protocol of analgosedation in COVID-19.","authors":"Cecilia Inés Loudet, Marisol García Sarubbio, María Julia Meschini, Jacqueline Vilca Becerra, María Agustina Mazzoleni, Vanesa Aramendi, Agustina Barbieri, Carolina Colavita, Gustavo Cerri, Sofía Pacho, Eliseo Hernán Ferrari, Rosa Reina","doi":"10.1016/j.medine.2025.502223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Primary: To evaluate the level of sedation, use, daily doses, and duration of analgosedative drugs in COVID-19 patients on mechanical ventilation (MV) using a standardized protocol, comparing survivors and non-survivors. Secondary: To identify independent predictors of hospital mortality.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Medical-surgical ICU.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring invasive MV and continuous infusion of analgosedation and/or neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) for at least 48 h.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>None.</p><p><strong>Main variables of interest: </strong>Level of sedation, use, daily doses, and duration of analgosedative drugs; hospital mortality and associated factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 198 patients (nurse-to-patient ratio 1:2.4; 65% staff turnover), median global RASS was -4.5. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed lower survival with deeper sedation. Fentanyl (99%) and midazolam (97%) were the most used, followed by NMBAs (81%), propofol and dexmedetomidine (48%). Non-benzodiazepine sedatives were precribed more in survivors (88%) than non-survivors (53%) (p < 0.01). Survivors had more days of fentanyl, midazolam, and dexmedetomidine; no differences in NMBA use or drug doses were observed. Mortality was 63%. Independent predictors of mortality included APACHE II, SOFA<sub>24</sub>, Charlson score, median RASS, and non-benzodiazepine sedative use.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Standardized protocols emphasizing the ACD components of the ABCDEF bundle, along with appropriate use of analgosedation and NMBAs despite limited staffing, effectively supported the management of sedation without significant dose differences between survivors and non-survivors. Sedation level and the use of non-benzodiazepine sedatives were independently associated with better outcomes, highlighting the importance of the light sedation and the ABCDEF bundle.</p>","PeriodicalId":94139,"journal":{"name":"Medicina intensiva","volume":" ","pages":"502223"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina intensiva","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medine.2025.502223","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Primary: To evaluate the level of sedation, use, daily doses, and duration of analgosedative drugs in COVID-19 patients on mechanical ventilation (MV) using a standardized protocol, comparing survivors and non-survivors. Secondary: To identify independent predictors of hospital mortality.

Design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Medical-surgical ICU.

Patients: Adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring invasive MV and continuous infusion of analgosedation and/or neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) for at least 48 h.

Interventions: None.

Main variables of interest: Level of sedation, use, daily doses, and duration of analgosedative drugs; hospital mortality and associated factors.

Results: Among 198 patients (nurse-to-patient ratio 1:2.4; 65% staff turnover), median global RASS was -4.5. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed lower survival with deeper sedation. Fentanyl (99%) and midazolam (97%) were the most used, followed by NMBAs (81%), propofol and dexmedetomidine (48%). Non-benzodiazepine sedatives were precribed more in survivors (88%) than non-survivors (53%) (p < 0.01). Survivors had more days of fentanyl, midazolam, and dexmedetomidine; no differences in NMBA use or drug doses were observed. Mortality was 63%. Independent predictors of mortality included APACHE II, SOFA24, Charlson score, median RASS, and non-benzodiazepine sedative use.

Conclusions: Standardized protocols emphasizing the ACD components of the ABCDEF bundle, along with appropriate use of analgosedation and NMBAs despite limited staffing, effectively supported the management of sedation without significant dose differences between survivors and non-survivors. Sedation level and the use of non-benzodiazepine sedatives were independently associated with better outcomes, highlighting the importance of the light sedation and the ABCDEF bundle.

镇痛、镇静和神经肌肉阻滞剂:新冠肺炎患者镇痛镇静的标准化方案
目的:主要:评估采用标准化方案机械通气(MV)的COVID-19患者镇静水平、使用、每日剂量和镇静药物持续时间,比较幸存者和非幸存者。次要目的:确定医院死亡率的独立预测因子。设计:回顾性队列研究。环境:内科-外科ICU。患者:成人SARS-CoV-2感染,需要侵入性MV和持续输注镇痛和/或神经肌肉阻断剂(nmba)至少48 h。干预措施:没有。感兴趣的主要变量:镇静水平、使用、每日剂量、镇痛药持续时间;医院死亡率及其相关因素。结果:198例患者中(护患比1:24 .4;65%的员工离职率),全球RASS中值为-4.5。Kaplan-Meier分析显示,镇静程度越深,生存率越低。使用最多的是芬太尼(99%)和咪达唑仑(97%),其次是nmba(81%)、异丙酚和右美托咪定(48%)。幸存者(88%)比非幸存者(53%)使用非苯二氮卓类镇静剂(p )24,Charlson评分、中位RASS和非苯二氮卓类镇静剂的使用。结论:标准化方案强调ABCDEF束的ACD成分,以及在人员有限的情况下适当使用镇静和NMBAs,有效地支持镇静管理,在幸存者和非幸存者之间没有显着的剂量差异。镇静水平和非苯二氮卓类镇静剂的使用与更好的结果独立相关,突出了轻度镇静和ABCDEF束的重要性。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信