Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
The purpose of this study was to assess Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) goal implementation in mechanically ventilated patients sedated in the emergency department (ED), compliance with RASS, and goal achievement. This study was a retrospective chart review at a large Level I trauma academic medical center. Patients who were intubated in the ED or en route to the ED between October 1, 2013, and October 1, 2014, were eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: aged 18 years or older, 24 hr or more on mechanically ventilated support receiving continuous sedation and/or analgesia during the first 48 hr of admission, and a hospital stay of 6 days or more. There were 205 patients identified; 104 failed inclusion, 101 were enrolled, and 62 were excluded. Thirty-nine patients (94.9%) had an RASS goal implemented in the ED, of which 37 patients (81.1%) had an RASS goal set by an ED physician. Assessment of the RASS was found to be inconsistent, as 56.8% of patients were evaluated by an ED nurse within 1 hr of sedative initiation. Of the 37 patients who had an RASS goal in the ED, 18.9% achieved their goal in the ED. A review of sedation prescribing revealed that 39% received a regimen of varied combinations of continuous infusions of propofol, dexmedetomidine, and midazolam throughout admission, 33% received a regimen of 2 of the aforementioned drugs, and 28% received only propofol. Median extubation time was 129 hr. Seven patients expired within 180 days of admission. The assessment of the RASS was a common practice, but there were inconsistencies in measurement. A limited number of patients achieved their RASS goal in the ED. These results support a provider and nursing knowledge deficit regarding RASS goal setting, proper documentation of RASS measurement, and the need for appropriate assessments.
The purpose of this study was to assess Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) goal implementation in mechanically ventilated patients sedated in the emergency department (ED), compliance with RASS, and goal achievement. This study was a retrospective chart review at a large Level I trauma academic medical center. Patients who were intubated in the ED or en route to the ED between October 1, 2013, and October 1, 2014, were eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: aged 18 years or older, 24 hr or more on mechanically ventilated support receiving continuous sedation and/or analgesia during the first 48 hr of admission, and a hospital stay of 6 days or more. There were 205 patients identified; 104 failed inclusion, 101 were enrolled, and 62 were excluded. Thirty-nine patients (94.9%) had an RASS goal implemented in the ED, of which 37 patients (81.1%) had an RASS goal set by an ED physician. Assessment of the RASS was found to be inconsistent, as 56.8% of patients were evaluated by an ED nurse within 1 hr of sedative initiation. Of the 37 patients who had an RASS goal in the ED, 18.9% achieved their goal in the ED. A review of sedation prescribing revealed that 39% received a regimen of varied combinations of continuous infusions of propofol, dexmedetomidine, and midazolam throughout admission, 33% received a regimen of 2 of the aforementioned drugs, and 28% received only propofol. Median extubation time was 129 hr. Seven patients expired within 180 days of admission. The assessment of the RASS was a common practice, but there were inconsistencies in measurement. A limited number of patients achieved their RASS goal in the ED. These results support a provider and nursing knowledge deficit regarding RASS goal setting, proper documentation of RASS measurement, and the need for appropriate assessments.
Intensive care patients are older, frailer, and more co-morbid than ever before, and remain at risk of a variety of adverse outcomes, both in ICU, and after discharge. Sedation and delirium play an intricate role in this complex system, and it can be difficult to determine if they are a contributor or consequence in any given situation. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the increased frequency of complex ventilatory management, including prone ventilation and neuromuscular blockade, necessitated deep sedation in many cases. In concert with infection control concerns and staffing pressures, the delivery of precision symptom- and patient-oriented sedation has waned in favour of strategies felt to be globally safe. Using the SPICE III study as a lens to understand both the importance of exploring heterogeneity of effect in large, complex RCTs of critically ill patients, and the importance of an individualised approach to sedation in the intensive care unit, we demonstrate the evolution of our understanding of sedation in this challenging environment. By following the principles that define the cornerstones of best contemporary sedation practice we can once more grow beyond the boundaries of clinical practice guidelines in the provision of personalised, patient-orientated sedation in the post-COVID intensive care unit.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.