急诊科与重症监护室插管患者的镇静措施对比。

Jariya Sereeyotin, Christopher Yarnell, Sangeeta Mehta
{"title":"急诊科与重症监护室插管患者的镇静措施对比。","authors":"Jariya Sereeyotin, Christopher Yarnell, Sangeeta Mehta","doi":"10.1101/2024.03.26.24304926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose\nThis study aimed to compare sedation management during and after intubation in the emergency department (ED) versus the intensive care unit (ICU).\nMethods\nThis was a single-center retrospective cohort study of adults intubated in the ED or in the ICU and received mechanical ventilation between January 2018 and February 2022. We collected data from the electronic medical record. The primary outcome was duration from intubation to first documentation of light sedation, defined as a Sedation Agitation Scale score (SAS) of 3-4.\nResults\nThe study included 264 patients, with 95 (36%) intubated in the ED and 169 (64%) in the ICU. Regarding anesthetic agents used for intubation, ketamine was the most commonly used drug in the ED and was used more frequently than in the ICU (61% vs 40%, p=0.001). Propofol was the predominant sedative used in the ICU, with a higher prevalence compared to the ED (50% vs 33%, p=0.01). Additionally, benzodiazepines and fentanyl were more frequently used in the ICU (39% vs 6%, p<0.001 and 68% vs 9.5%, p<0.001, respectively). Within 24 hours after intubation, 68% (65/95) ED patients and 82% (138/169) patients intubated in ICU achieved light sedation, with median durations of 13.5 hours and 10.5 hours. Patient location in the ED at intubation was associated with decreased probability of achieving light sedation at 24 hours (adjusted odds ratio 0.64, p=0.04).\nConclusion\nCritically ill patients intubated in the ED are at risk of deeper sedation and a longer time to achieve light sedation compared to patients intubated in the ICU.","PeriodicalId":501249,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sedation practices in patients intubated in the emergency department compared to the intensive care unit.\",\"authors\":\"Jariya Sereeyotin, Christopher Yarnell, Sangeeta Mehta\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.03.26.24304926\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose\\nThis study aimed to compare sedation management during and after intubation in the emergency department (ED) versus the intensive care unit (ICU).\\nMethods\\nThis was a single-center retrospective cohort study of adults intubated in the ED or in the ICU and received mechanical ventilation between January 2018 and February 2022. We collected data from the electronic medical record. The primary outcome was duration from intubation to first documentation of light sedation, defined as a Sedation Agitation Scale score (SAS) of 3-4.\\nResults\\nThe study included 264 patients, with 95 (36%) intubated in the ED and 169 (64%) in the ICU. Regarding anesthetic agents used for intubation, ketamine was the most commonly used drug in the ED and was used more frequently than in the ICU (61% vs 40%, p=0.001). Propofol was the predominant sedative used in the ICU, with a higher prevalence compared to the ED (50% vs 33%, p=0.01). Additionally, benzodiazepines and fentanyl were more frequently used in the ICU (39% vs 6%, p<0.001 and 68% vs 9.5%, p<0.001, respectively). Within 24 hours after intubation, 68% (65/95) ED patients and 82% (138/169) patients intubated in ICU achieved light sedation, with median durations of 13.5 hours and 10.5 hours. Patient location in the ED at intubation was associated with decreased probability of achieving light sedation at 24 hours (adjusted odds ratio 0.64, p=0.04).\\nConclusion\\nCritically ill patients intubated in the ED are at risk of deeper sedation and a longer time to achieve light sedation compared to patients intubated in the ICU.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501249,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"medRxiv - Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"medRxiv - Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.26.24304926\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.26.24304926","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

目的 本研究旨在比较急诊科(ED)与重症监护室(ICU)插管期间和插管后的镇静管理。方法 这是一项单中心回顾性队列研究,研究对象为 2018 年 1 月至 2022 年 2 月期间在急诊科或重症监护室插管并接受机械通气的成人。我们从电子病历中收集数据。主要结果是从插管到首次记录轻度镇静的持续时间,轻度镇静的定义是镇静激惹量表(SAS)评分为 3-4 分。关于插管使用的麻醉剂,氯胺酮是急诊室最常用的药物,使用频率高于重症监护室(61% 对 40%,P=0.001)。丙泊酚是重症监护室最常用的镇静剂,使用率高于急诊室(50% 对 33%,P=0.01)。此外,重症监护室使用苯二氮卓和芬太尼的频率更高(分别为 39% vs 6%,p<0.001 和 68% vs 9.5%,p<0.001)。插管后 24 小时内,68%(65/95)急诊科患者和 82%(138/169)重症监护室插管患者达到轻度镇静,中位持续时间分别为 13.5 小时和 10.5 小时。结论与在重症监护室插管的患者相比,在急诊室插管的重症患者可能需要更深的镇静和更长的时间才能达到轻度镇静。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sedation practices in patients intubated in the emergency department compared to the intensive care unit.
Purpose This study aimed to compare sedation management during and after intubation in the emergency department (ED) versus the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods This was a single-center retrospective cohort study of adults intubated in the ED or in the ICU and received mechanical ventilation between January 2018 and February 2022. We collected data from the electronic medical record. The primary outcome was duration from intubation to first documentation of light sedation, defined as a Sedation Agitation Scale score (SAS) of 3-4. Results The study included 264 patients, with 95 (36%) intubated in the ED and 169 (64%) in the ICU. Regarding anesthetic agents used for intubation, ketamine was the most commonly used drug in the ED and was used more frequently than in the ICU (61% vs 40%, p=0.001). Propofol was the predominant sedative used in the ICU, with a higher prevalence compared to the ED (50% vs 33%, p=0.01). Additionally, benzodiazepines and fentanyl were more frequently used in the ICU (39% vs 6%, p<0.001 and 68% vs 9.5%, p<0.001, respectively). Within 24 hours after intubation, 68% (65/95) ED patients and 82% (138/169) patients intubated in ICU achieved light sedation, with median durations of 13.5 hours and 10.5 hours. Patient location in the ED at intubation was associated with decreased probability of achieving light sedation at 24 hours (adjusted odds ratio 0.64, p=0.04). Conclusion Critically ill patients intubated in the ED are at risk of deeper sedation and a longer time to achieve light sedation compared to patients intubated in the ICU.
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