无创与有创机械通气对重症监护病房睡眠的影响——一项初步研究

A. O. Ugurlu, Karthik Jothianandan, C. D’Ambrosio, Samy S Sidhom, Eric Garpestad, N. Hill
{"title":"无创与有创机械通气对重症监护病房睡眠的影响——一项初步研究","authors":"A. O. Ugurlu, Karthik Jothianandan, C. D’Ambrosio, Samy S Sidhom, Eric Garpestad, N. Hill","doi":"10.33590/emjrespir/20-00011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rationale: Use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has increased in intensive care units, but sleep during NIV has received little attention. The authors surmised that due to frequent air leaks and mask discomfort, patients receiving NIV would manifest poorer sleep quality than those receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (INV).\n\nMethods: A prospective observational study on patients receiving NIV or INV for respiratory failure in a medical intensive care unit or coronary care unit. Patients were monitored by polysomnography for 24 hours with simultaneous collection of data on ventilator and environmental parameters.\n\nResults: Eight subjects in each group were studied. Mean total sleep time was 7.29 +1.78 hours (range: 0.57–13.82) in the NIV versus 11.74 +0.65 hours (8.95–15.19) in the INV group (p=0.034). Sleep efficiency was lower in NIV than INV group (30.4% versus 53.3%, respectively; p=0.013). The NIV group had lighter sleep than the INV group (mean % of Stage 1: 36.9% versus 17.2% of total sleep time, respectively; p=0.000), whereas no significant differences were found for other stages. Median total arousal and awakening indexes were higher in the NIV group (16.8/hour versus 4.4/hour and 5.3/hour versus 2.1/hour, respectively; p=0.005), as well as spontaneous arousals and awakenings (p=0.006 and p=0.005, respectively). Sedation was provided mostly by intermittent bolus in the NIV group whereas often by infusion in the INV group.\n\nConclusion: Compared to INV, NIV in critically ill patients was associated with poorer quality and quantity of sleep. Future studies should determine whether adjustments in ventilator settings, mask type or fit, or use of sedation/analgaesia can improve sleep in patients receiving NIV.","PeriodicalId":300382,"journal":{"name":"EMJ Respiratory","volume":"401 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of Noninvasive Versus Invasive Mechanical Ventilation on Sleep in the Intensive Care Unit – A Pilot Study\",\"authors\":\"A. O. Ugurlu, Karthik Jothianandan, C. D’Ambrosio, Samy S Sidhom, Eric Garpestad, N. Hill\",\"doi\":\"10.33590/emjrespir/20-00011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Rationale: Use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has increased in intensive care units, but sleep during NIV has received little attention. The authors surmised that due to frequent air leaks and mask discomfort, patients receiving NIV would manifest poorer sleep quality than those receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (INV).\\n\\nMethods: A prospective observational study on patients receiving NIV or INV for respiratory failure in a medical intensive care unit or coronary care unit. Patients were monitored by polysomnography for 24 hours with simultaneous collection of data on ventilator and environmental parameters.\\n\\nResults: Eight subjects in each group were studied. Mean total sleep time was 7.29 +1.78 hours (range: 0.57–13.82) in the NIV versus 11.74 +0.65 hours (8.95–15.19) in the INV group (p=0.034). Sleep efficiency was lower in NIV than INV group (30.4% versus 53.3%, respectively; p=0.013). The NIV group had lighter sleep than the INV group (mean % of Stage 1: 36.9% versus 17.2% of total sleep time, respectively; p=0.000), whereas no significant differences were found for other stages. Median total arousal and awakening indexes were higher in the NIV group (16.8/hour versus 4.4/hour and 5.3/hour versus 2.1/hour, respectively; p=0.005), as well as spontaneous arousals and awakenings (p=0.006 and p=0.005, respectively). Sedation was provided mostly by intermittent bolus in the NIV group whereas often by infusion in the INV group.\\n\\nConclusion: Compared to INV, NIV in critically ill patients was associated with poorer quality and quantity of sleep. Future studies should determine whether adjustments in ventilator settings, mask type or fit, or use of sedation/analgaesia can improve sleep in patients receiving NIV.\",\"PeriodicalId\":300382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EMJ Respiratory\",\"volume\":\"401 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EMJ Respiratory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33590/emjrespir/20-00011\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EMJ Respiratory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33590/emjrespir/20-00011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

理由:无创通气(NIV)的使用在重症监护病房有所增加,但无创通气期间的睡眠很少受到关注。作者推测,由于频繁漏气和口罩不适,接受NIV的患者比接受有创机械通气(INV)的患者表现出更差的睡眠质量。方法:一项前瞻性观察研究,对在重症监护病房或冠状动脉监护病房接受NIV或INV治疗呼吸衰竭的患者进行观察。采用多导睡眠描记术监测患者24小时,同时收集呼吸机和环境参数数据。结果:每组8名受试者。NIV组平均总睡眠时间为7.29 +1.78小时(范围:0.57-13.82),而INV组为11.74 +0.65小时(8.95-15.19)(p=0.034)。NIV组睡眠效率低于INV组(分别为30.4%和53.3%);p = 0.013)。NIV组比INV组的睡眠时间更短(第一阶段的平均百分比:分别占总睡眠时间的36.9%和17.2%;P =0.000),而其他阶段无显著差异。NIV组的总觉醒指数和觉醒指数中位数更高(分别为16.8/小时比4.4/小时和5.3/小时比2.1/小时);P =0.005),以及自发觉醒(P =0.006和P =0.005)。镇静在NIV组中主要通过间歇丸剂提供,而在INV组中经常通过输液提供。结论:与INV相比,危重患者NIV与较差的睡眠质量和睡眠量有关。未来的研究应确定调整呼吸机设置、口罩类型或适合度,或使用镇静/镇痛是否可以改善接受无创通气患者的睡眠。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of Noninvasive Versus Invasive Mechanical Ventilation on Sleep in the Intensive Care Unit – A Pilot Study
Rationale: Use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has increased in intensive care units, but sleep during NIV has received little attention. The authors surmised that due to frequent air leaks and mask discomfort, patients receiving NIV would manifest poorer sleep quality than those receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (INV). Methods: A prospective observational study on patients receiving NIV or INV for respiratory failure in a medical intensive care unit or coronary care unit. Patients were monitored by polysomnography for 24 hours with simultaneous collection of data on ventilator and environmental parameters. Results: Eight subjects in each group were studied. Mean total sleep time was 7.29 +1.78 hours (range: 0.57–13.82) in the NIV versus 11.74 +0.65 hours (8.95–15.19) in the INV group (p=0.034). Sleep efficiency was lower in NIV than INV group (30.4% versus 53.3%, respectively; p=0.013). The NIV group had lighter sleep than the INV group (mean % of Stage 1: 36.9% versus 17.2% of total sleep time, respectively; p=0.000), whereas no significant differences were found for other stages. Median total arousal and awakening indexes were higher in the NIV group (16.8/hour versus 4.4/hour and 5.3/hour versus 2.1/hour, respectively; p=0.005), as well as spontaneous arousals and awakenings (p=0.006 and p=0.005, respectively). Sedation was provided mostly by intermittent bolus in the NIV group whereas often by infusion in the INV group. Conclusion: Compared to INV, NIV in critically ill patients was associated with poorer quality and quantity of sleep. Future studies should determine whether adjustments in ventilator settings, mask type or fit, or use of sedation/analgaesia can improve sleep in patients receiving NIV.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信