Citations

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.

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.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify factors affecting physicians’ cognition and clinical behavior when evaluating patients that may need fluid therapy. BACKGROUND: Proponents of dynamic fluid responsiveness testing advocate measuring cardiac output or stroke volume after a maneuver to prove that further fluids will increase cardiac output. However, surveys suggest that fluid therapy in clinical practice is often given without prior responsiveness testing. DESIGN: Thematic analysis of face-to-face structured interviews. SETTING: ICUs and medical-surgical wards in acute care hospitals. SUBJECTS: Intensivists and hospitalist physicians. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We conducted 43 interviews with experienced physicians in 19 hospitals. Hospitalized patients with hypotension, tachycardia, oliguria, or elevated serum lactate are commonly seen by physicians who weigh the risks and benefits of more fluid therapy. Encounters are often with unfamiliar patients and evaluation and decisions are completed quickly without involving other physicians. Dynamic testing for fluid responsiveness is used much less often than static methods and fluid boluses are often ordered with no testing at all. This approach is rationalized by factors that discourage dynamic testing: unavailability of equipment, time to obtain test results, or lack of expertise in obtaining valid data. Two mental calculations are particularly influential: physicians’ estimate of the base rate of fluid responsiveness (determined by physical examination, chart review, and previous responses to fluid boluses) and physicians’ perception of patient harm if 500 or 1,000 mL fluid boluses are ordered. When the perception of harm is low, physicians use heuristics that rationalize skipping dynamic testing. LIMITATIONS: Geographic limitation to hospitals in Minnesota, United States. CONCLUSIONS: If dynamic responsiveness testing is to be used more often in routine clinical practice, physicians must be more convinced of the benefits of dynamic testing, that they can obtain valid results quickly and believe that even small fluid boluses harm their patients.

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.

Background Weaning from mechanical ventilation requires increased respiratory effort, which can heighten anxiety and later prolong the need for mechanical ventilation. Objectives To examine the predictive associations of music intervention, anxiety, sedative exposure, and patients’ characteristics on time to initiation and duration of weaning trials of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Methods A descriptive, correlational design was used for a secondary analysis of data from a randomized trial. Music listening was defined as self-initiated, patient-directed music via headphones. Anxiety was measured daily with a visual analog scale. Sedative exposure was operationalized as a daily sedation intensity score and a sedative dose frequency. Analyses consisted of descriptive statistics, graphing, survival analysis, Cox proportional hazards regression, and linear regression. Results Of 307 patients, 52% were women and 86% were white. Mean age was 59.3 (SD, 14.4) years, mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III score was 62.9 (SD, 21.6), mean duration of ventilatory support was 8 (range, 1–52) days, and mean stay in the intensive care unit was 18 (range, 2–71) days. Music listening, anxiety levels, and sedative exposure did not influence time to initial weaning trial or duration of trials. Clinical factors of illness severity, days of weaning trials, and tracheostomy placement influenced weaning patterns in this sample. Conclusions Prospective studies of music intervention and other psychophysiological factors during weaning from mechanical ventilation are needed to better understand factors that promote successful weaning.