Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation.
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2005 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10400.10/678 |
Resumo: | OBJECTIVE: To describe the use of sedatives and neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBs) and their impact in outcome in an international cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. METHODS: We analyzed the database of a prospective, multicenter cohort of 5,183 adult patients who received mechanical ventilation for > 12 h. We considered that a patient received a given agent when it was administered for at least 3 h in a 24-h period. RESULTS: A total of 3,540 patients (68%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 67 to 69%) received a sedative at any time while receiving mechanical ventilation. The median number of days of use was 3 (interquartile range [IQR], 2 to 6 days). The persistent use of sedative was associated with more days of mechanical ventilation (median, 4 days [IQR, 2 to 8 days], vs 3 days [IQR, 2 to 4 days] in patients who did not receive sedatives [p < 0.001]); more weaning days (median, 2 days [IQR, 1 to 3 days], vs 2 days [IQR, 1 to 5 days] in patients who did not receive sedatives [p < 0.001]); and longer length of stay in the ICU (median, 8 days [IQR, 5 to 15 days], vs 5 days [IQR, 3 to 9 days] in patients who did not receive sedatives [p < 0.001]). Six hundred eighty-six patients (13%; 95% CI, 12 to 14%) received an NMB for at least 1 day. The median number of days of use was 2 (IQR, 1 to 4 days). The administration of an NMB was independently related with age, a normal previous functional status, main reason of mechanical ventilation (patients with ARDS received more NMBs), and with patient management (patients requiring permissive hypercapnia, prone position, high level of positive end-expiratory pressure, and high airways pressure). CONCLUSIONS: The use of sedatives is very common, and their use is associated with a longer duration of mechanical ventilation, weaning time, and stay in the ICU. NMBs are used in 13% of the patients and are associated with longer duration of mechanical ventilation, weaning time, stay in the ICU, and higher mortality. |
id |
RCAP_81fe2442088f50f90161ab388c10624a |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.hff.min-saude.pt:10400.10/678 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation.Respiração artificialUnidade de cuidados intensivosMechanical ventilationIntensive care unitsSedativesOBJECTIVE: To describe the use of sedatives and neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBs) and their impact in outcome in an international cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. METHODS: We analyzed the database of a prospective, multicenter cohort of 5,183 adult patients who received mechanical ventilation for > 12 h. We considered that a patient received a given agent when it was administered for at least 3 h in a 24-h period. RESULTS: A total of 3,540 patients (68%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 67 to 69%) received a sedative at any time while receiving mechanical ventilation. The median number of days of use was 3 (interquartile range [IQR], 2 to 6 days). The persistent use of sedative was associated with more days of mechanical ventilation (median, 4 days [IQR, 2 to 8 days], vs 3 days [IQR, 2 to 4 days] in patients who did not receive sedatives [p < 0.001]); more weaning days (median, 2 days [IQR, 1 to 3 days], vs 2 days [IQR, 1 to 5 days] in patients who did not receive sedatives [p < 0.001]); and longer length of stay in the ICU (median, 8 days [IQR, 5 to 15 days], vs 5 days [IQR, 3 to 9 days] in patients who did not receive sedatives [p < 0.001]). Six hundred eighty-six patients (13%; 95% CI, 12 to 14%) received an NMB for at least 1 day. The median number of days of use was 2 (IQR, 1 to 4 days). The administration of an NMB was independently related with age, a normal previous functional status, main reason of mechanical ventilation (patients with ARDS received more NMBs), and with patient management (patients requiring permissive hypercapnia, prone position, high level of positive end-expiratory pressure, and high airways pressure). CONCLUSIONS: The use of sedatives is very common, and their use is associated with a longer duration of mechanical ventilation, weaning time, and stay in the ICU. NMBs are used in 13% of the patients and are associated with longer duration of mechanical ventilation, weaning time, stay in the ICU, and higher mortality.American College of Chest PhysiciansRepositório do Hospital Prof. Doutor Fernando FonsecaArroliga, AFrutos-Vivar, FHall, JEsteban, AApezteguía, CSoto, LAnzueto, AFreitas, PTInternational Mechanical Ventilation Study Group.2012-08-29T13:00:24Z2005-01-01T00:00:00Z2005-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.10/678engChest. 2005 Aug;128(2):496-506.0012-3692info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2022-09-20T15:51:33Zoai:repositorio.hff.min-saude.pt:10400.10/678Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T15:51:54.775040Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. |
title |
Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. |
spellingShingle |
Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. Arroliga, A Respiração artificial Unidade de cuidados intensivos Mechanical ventilation Intensive care units Sedatives |
title_short |
Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. |
title_full |
Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. |
title_fullStr |
Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. |
title_sort |
Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. |
author |
Arroliga, A |
author_facet |
Arroliga, A Frutos-Vivar, F Hall, J Esteban, A Apezteguía, C Soto, L Anzueto, A Freitas, PT International Mechanical Ventilation Study Group. |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Frutos-Vivar, F Hall, J Esteban, A Apezteguía, C Soto, L Anzueto, A Freitas, PT International Mechanical Ventilation Study Group. |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Repositório do Hospital Prof. Doutor Fernando Fonseca |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Arroliga, A Frutos-Vivar, F Hall, J Esteban, A Apezteguía, C Soto, L Anzueto, A Freitas, PT International Mechanical Ventilation Study Group. |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Respiração artificial Unidade de cuidados intensivos Mechanical ventilation Intensive care units Sedatives |
topic |
Respiração artificial Unidade de cuidados intensivos Mechanical ventilation Intensive care units Sedatives |
description |
OBJECTIVE: To describe the use of sedatives and neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBs) and their impact in outcome in an international cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation. METHODS: We analyzed the database of a prospective, multicenter cohort of 5,183 adult patients who received mechanical ventilation for > 12 h. We considered that a patient received a given agent when it was administered for at least 3 h in a 24-h period. RESULTS: A total of 3,540 patients (68%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 67 to 69%) received a sedative at any time while receiving mechanical ventilation. The median number of days of use was 3 (interquartile range [IQR], 2 to 6 days). The persistent use of sedative was associated with more days of mechanical ventilation (median, 4 days [IQR, 2 to 8 days], vs 3 days [IQR, 2 to 4 days] in patients who did not receive sedatives [p < 0.001]); more weaning days (median, 2 days [IQR, 1 to 3 days], vs 2 days [IQR, 1 to 5 days] in patients who did not receive sedatives [p < 0.001]); and longer length of stay in the ICU (median, 8 days [IQR, 5 to 15 days], vs 5 days [IQR, 3 to 9 days] in patients who did not receive sedatives [p < 0.001]). Six hundred eighty-six patients (13%; 95% CI, 12 to 14%) received an NMB for at least 1 day. The median number of days of use was 2 (IQR, 1 to 4 days). The administration of an NMB was independently related with age, a normal previous functional status, main reason of mechanical ventilation (patients with ARDS received more NMBs), and with patient management (patients requiring permissive hypercapnia, prone position, high level of positive end-expiratory pressure, and high airways pressure). CONCLUSIONS: The use of sedatives is very common, and their use is associated with a longer duration of mechanical ventilation, weaning time, and stay in the ICU. NMBs are used in 13% of the patients and are associated with longer duration of mechanical ventilation, weaning time, stay in the ICU, and higher mortality. |
publishDate |
2005 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2005-01-01T00:00:00Z 2005-01-01T00:00:00Z 2012-08-29T13:00:24Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.10/678 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.10/678 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Chest. 2005 Aug;128(2):496-506. 0012-3692 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
American College of Chest Physicians |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
American College of Chest Physicians |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799130383340535808 |