Use of sedatives and neuromuscular blockers in a cohort of patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Arroliga, A
Data de Publicação: 2005
Outros Autores: Frutos-Vivar, F, Hall, J, Esteban, A, Apezteguía, C, Soto, L, Anzueto, A, Freitas, PT, International Mechanical Ventilation Study Group.
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