评估接受神经肌肉阻滞剂治疗的瘫痪重症患者的疼痛:单中心前瞻性队列。

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Jules Voeltzel , Océane Garnier , Albert Prades , Julie Carr , Audrey De Jong , Nicolas Molinari , Samir Jaber , Gerald Chanques
{"title":"评估接受神经肌肉阻滞剂治疗的瘫痪重症患者的疼痛:单中心前瞻性队列。","authors":"Jules Voeltzel ,&nbsp;Océane Garnier ,&nbsp;Albert Prades ,&nbsp;Julie Carr ,&nbsp;Audrey De Jong ,&nbsp;Nicolas Molinari ,&nbsp;Samir Jaber ,&nbsp;Gerald Chanques","doi":"10.1016/j.accpm.2024.101384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Given the absence of established recommendations for pain assessment in pharmacologically paralyzed Intensive-Care-Units (ICU) patients under Neuro-Muscular-Blocking Agents (NMBA), this study assessed the validity of various parameters for evaluating pain in this specific population.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and methods</h3><p>Four electrophysiological parameters (instant-Analgesia-Nociception-Index (ANI), Bispectral index (BIS), Heart Rate (HR) and Mean Arterial Blood Pressure (ABP)) and one clinical parameter (Behavioural-Pain-Scale (BPS)) were recorded during tracheal-suctioning in all consecutive ICU patients who required a continuous infusion of cisatracurium, before and just after paralysis recovery measured by Train-of-Four ratio. The validity of the five pain-related parameters was assessed by comparing the values recorded during different situations (before/during/after the nociceptive procedure) (discriminant-validity, primary outcome), and the effect of paralysis was assessed by comparing values obtained during and after paralysis (reliability, secondary outcome).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty patients were analyzed. ANI, BIS, and HR significantly changed during the nociceptive procedure in both paralysis and recovery, while BPS changed only post-recovery. ANI and HR were unaffected by paralysis, unlike BIS and BPS (mixed-effect model). ANI exhibited the highest discriminant-validity, with values (min 0/max 100) decreasing from 71 [48–89] at rest to 41 [25–72] during tracheal suctioning in paralyzed patients, and from 71 [53–85] at rest to 40 [31–52] in non-paralyzed patients.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>ANI proves the most discriminant parameter for pain detection in both paralyzed and non-paralyzed sedated ICU patients. Its significant and clinically relevant decrease during tracheal suctioning remains unaltered by NMBA use. Pending further studies on analgesia protocols based on ANI, it could be used to assess pain during nociceptive procedures in ICU patients receiving NMBA.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48762,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine","volume":"43 4","pages":"Article 101384"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352556824000420/pdfft?md5=b2107590c2f9a0183a8e170fe122a8d9&pid=1-s2.0-S2352556824000420-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing pain in paralyzed critically ill patients receiving neuromuscular blocking agents: A monocenter prospective cohort\",\"authors\":\"Jules Voeltzel ,&nbsp;Océane Garnier ,&nbsp;Albert Prades ,&nbsp;Julie Carr ,&nbsp;Audrey De Jong ,&nbsp;Nicolas Molinari ,&nbsp;Samir Jaber ,&nbsp;Gerald Chanques\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.accpm.2024.101384\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Given the absence of established recommendations for pain assessment in pharmacologically paralyzed Intensive-Care-Units (ICU) patients under Neuro-Muscular-Blocking Agents (NMBA), this study assessed the validity of various parameters for evaluating pain in this specific population.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and methods</h3><p>Four electrophysiological parameters (instant-Analgesia-Nociception-Index (ANI), Bispectral index (BIS), Heart Rate (HR) and Mean Arterial Blood Pressure (ABP)) and one clinical parameter (Behavioural-Pain-Scale (BPS)) were recorded during tracheal-suctioning in all consecutive ICU patients who required a continuous infusion of cisatracurium, before and just after paralysis recovery measured by Train-of-Four ratio. The validity of the five pain-related parameters was assessed by comparing the values recorded during different situations (before/during/after the nociceptive procedure) (discriminant-validity, primary outcome), and the effect of paralysis was assessed by comparing values obtained during and after paralysis (reliability, secondary outcome).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twenty patients were analyzed. ANI, BIS, and HR significantly changed during the nociceptive procedure in both paralysis and recovery, while BPS changed only post-recovery. ANI and HR were unaffected by paralysis, unlike BIS and BPS (mixed-effect model). ANI exhibited the highest discriminant-validity, with values (min 0/max 100) decreasing from 71 [48–89] at rest to 41 [25–72] during tracheal suctioning in paralyzed patients, and from 71 [53–85] at rest to 40 [31–52] in non-paralyzed patients.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>ANI proves the most discriminant parameter for pain detection in both paralyzed and non-paralyzed sedated ICU patients. Its significant and clinically relevant decrease during tracheal suctioning remains unaltered by NMBA use. Pending further studies on analgesia protocols based on ANI, it could be used to assess pain during nociceptive procedures in ICU patients receiving NMBA.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48762,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine\",\"volume\":\"43 4\",\"pages\":\"Article 101384\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352556824000420/pdfft?md5=b2107590c2f9a0183a8e170fe122a8d9&pid=1-s2.0-S2352556824000420-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352556824000420\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352556824000420","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:鉴于缺乏对使用神经肌肉阻滞剂(NMBA)的药物麻痹重症监护病房(ICU)患者进行疼痛评估的既定建议,本研究评估了评估这一特殊人群疼痛的各种参数的有效性:在所有需要持续输注顺阿曲库铵的连续 ICU 患者中,在气管抽吸过程中记录了四个电生理参数(瞬时疼痛-痛觉指数(ANI)、双谱指数(BIS)、心率(HR)和平均动脉血压(ABP))和一个临床参数(行为-疼痛量表(BPS))。通过比较不同情况下(麻醉过程前/中/后)记录的数值,评估了五个疼痛相关参数的有效性(判别有效性,主要结果);通过比较麻醉过程中和麻醉后获得的数值,评估了麻痹的影响(可靠性,次要结果):对 20 名患者进行了分析。ANI、BIS和心率在瘫痪和恢复过程中的痛觉过程中均有显著变化,而BPS仅在恢复后发生变化。与 BIS 和 BPS 不同,ANI 和心率不受瘫痪的影响(混合效应模型)。ANI 具有最高的判别效力,瘫痪患者的 ANI 值(最小 0/最大 100)从静息时的 71 [48-89] 下降到气管抽吸时的 41 [25-72],而非瘫痪患者的 ANI 值从静息时的 71 [53-85] 下降到 40 [31-52]:事实证明,ANI 是瘫痪和非瘫痪镇静 ICU 患者疼痛检测中最具鉴别力的参数。在气管抽吸过程中,其明显的临床相关性下降并不会因使用 NMBA 而改变。在对基于 ANI 的镇痛方案进行进一步研究之前,它可用于评估接受 NMBA 的 ICU 患者在痛觉过程中的疼痛。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing pain in paralyzed critically ill patients receiving neuromuscular blocking agents: A monocenter prospective cohort

Introduction

Given the absence of established recommendations for pain assessment in pharmacologically paralyzed Intensive-Care-Units (ICU) patients under Neuro-Muscular-Blocking Agents (NMBA), this study assessed the validity of various parameters for evaluating pain in this specific population.

Patients and methods

Four electrophysiological parameters (instant-Analgesia-Nociception-Index (ANI), Bispectral index (BIS), Heart Rate (HR) and Mean Arterial Blood Pressure (ABP)) and one clinical parameter (Behavioural-Pain-Scale (BPS)) were recorded during tracheal-suctioning in all consecutive ICU patients who required a continuous infusion of cisatracurium, before and just after paralysis recovery measured by Train-of-Four ratio. The validity of the five pain-related parameters was assessed by comparing the values recorded during different situations (before/during/after the nociceptive procedure) (discriminant-validity, primary outcome), and the effect of paralysis was assessed by comparing values obtained during and after paralysis (reliability, secondary outcome).

Results

Twenty patients were analyzed. ANI, BIS, and HR significantly changed during the nociceptive procedure in both paralysis and recovery, while BPS changed only post-recovery. ANI and HR were unaffected by paralysis, unlike BIS and BPS (mixed-effect model). ANI exhibited the highest discriminant-validity, with values (min 0/max 100) decreasing from 71 [48–89] at rest to 41 [25–72] during tracheal suctioning in paralyzed patients, and from 71 [53–85] at rest to 40 [31–52] in non-paralyzed patients.

Conclusions

ANI proves the most discriminant parameter for pain detection in both paralyzed and non-paralyzed sedated ICU patients. Its significant and clinically relevant decrease during tracheal suctioning remains unaltered by NMBA use. Pending further studies on analgesia protocols based on ANI, it could be used to assess pain during nociceptive procedures in ICU patients receiving NMBA.

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
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
5.50%
发文量
150
审稿时长
18 days
期刊介绍: Anaesthesia, Critical Care & Pain Medicine (formerly Annales Françaises d''Anesthésie et de Réanimation) publishes in English the highest quality original material, both scientific and clinical, on all aspects of anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine.
×
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