Abstract Rationale Mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients receive sedatives based on clinician observations of arousal and motor activity with potential for negative consequences and poor mitigation of symptoms. Objectives To test the preliminary efficacy of patient self-managed sedative therapy compared to usual care of nurse-administered sedation on self-reported anxiety, duration of mechanical ventilation, and delirium incidence (CAM-ICU). Methods A two-group, open-label, randomized, multicenter clinical trial in 5 Midwestern hospitals enrolled 161 patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation who were willing and able to use a push-button device to self-administer sedation for up to 7 days. Patients were randomized 1:1 using center-stratified blocks to usual care (n = 81) or intervention (n = 80) with self-administered dexmedetomidine. Intervention patients were allowed 3 self-administered dexmedetomidine boluses per hour (0.25 mcg/kg) with 20-minute lock-outs. The initial basal infusion (0.2 mcg/kg/hr) was adjusted by nurses between 0.1-0.7 mcg/kg/hr based on patient-delivered boluses in the prior 2 hours. Analysis consisted of linear mixed-effects model for comparisons of anxiety ratings over time and duration of mechanical ventilation. Incidence of delirium was analyzed using generalized estimating equations. Measurement and Main Results Sample characteristics had a female (54.7%) and Caucasian preponderance (92.5%) with a median age of 62 years on protocol for a median of 88 hours. Nine intervention patients were extubated prior to protocol initiation. Patient self-reported three times daily anxiety ratings with a visual analog scale (VAS) ranged from 0-100 over time but were not significantly different between groups in either an intention-to-treat (ITT) or per protocol (PP) analysis (p = 0.94, p = 0.30 respectively). While intervention patients had shorter duration of MV [(mean 50.8(52.8) vs. usual care 68.7(58.2) hours), p = 0.02 ITT], PP analysis resulted in no difference between groups (mean 56.4 (53.0) vs. 68.7(58.2), p = 0.23). 10.2% of intervention patients developed new incidence of delirium vs. 8.5% of usual care which was not significantly different between groups by either ITT (p = 0.65) or PP analyses (p = 0.58). Conclusions Intervention patients had similar outcomes compared to usual care patients. Self-administration of sedative therapy is a safe, novel patient-centered intervention warranting further rigorous investigation for anxiety self-management.
Self-management of Sedative Therapy Among Mechanically Ventilated Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Two-group Randomized Clinical Trial
Abstract RATIONALE: Clinical practice guidelines recommend that mechanically ventilated patients (MVPs) receiving sedative therapy achieve a target goal of ‘awake and calm’ when medically possible. However, ICU sedation practices rely on clinicians’ administration of medications based on observations of patients’ arousal/motor activity that are not consistently based on symptom assessments nor consider patients’ preferences. We hypothesized that MVPs would safely self-manage sedative therapy (SMST) base on individual needs and perceived anxiety while experiencing less sedative exposure and delirium. METHODS: A two-group randomized clinical trial conducted in two Midwestern academic medical centers enrolled 161 MVPs willing and able to depress a medication delivery push-button device who remained on protocol for 7 days or until extubated, withdrew or died. Control group (CG) patients (n=81) received sedative medications administered by ICU nurses per unit protocols. Experimental SMST group patients (n=80) received a basal infusion of dexmedetomidine (0.2 mcg/kg/hr titrated per algorithm) + self-administered bolus doses (0.25 mcg/kg up to 3/hour). Primary outcomes were anxiety ratings using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS-A), sedation intensity score (aggregate summary of 9 intravenous sedative/opioid medications received range 0-36), and incidence of delirium using the CAM-ICU. Analyses were descriptive and parametric statistics and Generalized Estimating Equations. RESULTS: Patients were predominantly White (93%) females (55%), mean age 58.9+15.1 years receiving mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure (60%) with mean APACHE III of 84.5 + 32.5. Anxiety was highly variable over time wherein patients in both groups endorsed the full range from 0-100. VAS-A over time between groups was -0.06 (p=0.98) indicating that anxiety was 0.06 units lower for SMST patients versus CG. Median sedation intensity in SMST group 11.8 + 9.6, compared to CG 12.7 + 9.6 (p = 0.55) over 7 days. 10.2% of SMST patients had one or more incident delirium events compared to 8.5% of CG (p =.97). Hypotension was experienced equally between groups: 22 in SMST, 23 in CG (p = 1.0) as were device disruptions: 2 in SMST versus 3 in CG (p = 1.0). 82% of SMST were satisfied/very satisfied with ability to self-administer dexmedetomidine; 70% were satisfied/very satisfied with ability to control anxiety; 68% were satisfied/very satisfied with the level of relaxation experienced. CONCLUSIONS: Although there were no significant differences between groups on the primary outcomes, the experimental SMST intervention was safe with high patient-reported satisfaction. SMST may be a viable new paradigm for sedative therapy administration among select ICU patients.
Description of Intensive Care Unit Experiences Among Mechanically Ventilated Patients Enrolled in a Symptom Self-management Clinical Trial
B23. PROMOTING HIGH-QUALITY PATIENT- AND FAMILY-CENTERED CRITICAL CARE DURING THE ICU STAY AND BEYOND | April 30, 2024 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: A3111-A3111
B18. SYMPTOMS AND COMMUNICATION AMONG PATIENTS AND FAMILIES | May 24, 2022 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: A5571-A5571
Introduction: In inpatient behavioral health units, a long-standing behavioral management controversy has been whether to physically restrain or seclude patients. The rate of restraint use at the institution underperformed compared with the national average, which led to the project implementation. Aims: This quality improvement project’s objective was to decrease restraint and seclusion use, improve quality of care, and decrease cost through implementation of recovery model principles. Method: Implementation started in October 2019 on a 14-bed inpatient medical/geriatric psychiatric unit with 38 psychiatric RNs at a large academic medical center. The project was a pre–post implementation design with interventions consisting of staff education, RN language observation, and orientation toolkit development. Changes in staff knowledge were measured by Recovery Knowledge Inventory surveys at baseline, 1 week posteducation, and 4 months posteducation. Restraint and seclusion use data were analyzed 3 months preimplementation and 3 months postimplementation. Results: Staff knowledge of the recovery model increased from baseline to 1 week postimplementation in all four survey domains (range = 6% to 9% improvement). While improvements were maintained in two survey domains, two domains of staff knowledge showed slight declines (1% to 2% decline in scores) 4 months postintervention. Restraint use decreased 73.1% and seclusion use decreased 16.3% from pre to postintervention. Conclusion: Implementation of recovery model principles can decrease restraint and seclusion episodes, which increases quality and decreases cost to the organization.
Letting the Patient Decide: A Case Report of Self-Administered Sedation During Mechanical Ventilation
It is common for critical care nurses to administer sedative medications to patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Although patient-controlled analgesia is frequently used in practice to promote effective self-management of pain by patients, it is not known if patient-controlled sedation can be used to promote effective self-management of distressing symptoms associated with mechanical ventilation. A randomized pilot trial was conducted to evaluate whether patient self-administered sedation with dexmedetomidine is safe and acceptable for self-management of anxiety during ventilator support. This case report details the experiences of one patient enrolled in the pilot trial who was randomly assigned to the experimental dexmedetomidine intervention, completed the study protocol, and provided feedback. In a poststudy survey, the patient responded positively to the use of self-administered sedation with dexmedetomidine during ventilator support.