Perceptions and practices regarding light sedation in mechanically ventilated patients: a survey on the attitudes of Brazilian critical care physicians.

Q2 Medicine Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva Pub Date : 2022-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-03 DOI:10.5935/0103-507X.20220278-pt
Vicente Cés de Souza-Dantas, Lilian Maria Sobreira Tanaka, Rodrigo Bernardo Serafim, Jorge Ibrain Figueira Salluh
{"title":"Perceptions and practices regarding light sedation in mechanically ventilated patients: a survey on the attitudes of Brazilian critical care physicians.","authors":"Vicente Cés de Souza-Dantas, Lilian Maria Sobreira Tanaka, Rodrigo Bernardo Serafim, Jorge Ibrain Figueira Salluh","doi":"10.5935/0103-507X.20220278-pt","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To characterize the knowledge and perceived attitudes toward pharmacologic interventions for light sedation in mechanically ventilated patients and to understand the current gaps comparing current practice with the recommendations of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the Intensive Care Unit.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a cross-sectional cohort study based on the application of an electronic questionnaire focused on sedation practices.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 303 critical care physicians provided responses to the survey. Most respondents reported routine use of a structured sedation scale (281; 92.6%). Almost half of the respondents reported performing daily interruptions of sedation (147; 48.4%), and the same percentage of participants (48.0%) agreed that patients are often over sedated. During the COVID-19 pandemic, participants reported that patients had a higher chance of receiving midazolam compared to before the pandemic (178; 58.8% versus 106; 34.0%; p = 0.05), and heavy sedation was more common during the COVID-19 pandemic (241; 79.4% versus 148; 49.0%; p = 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This survey provides valuable data on the perceived attitudes of Brazilian intensive care physicians regarding sedation. Although daily interruption of sedation was a well-known concept and sedation scales were often used by the respondents, insufficient effort was put into frequent monitoring, use of protocols and systematic implementation of sedation strategies. Despite the perception of the benefits linked with light sedation, there is a need to identify improvement targets to propose educational strategies to improve current practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":53519,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva","volume":"34 4","pages":"426-432"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9987013/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5935/0103-507X.20220278-pt","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To characterize the knowledge and perceived attitudes toward pharmacologic interventions for light sedation in mechanically ventilated patients and to understand the current gaps comparing current practice with the recommendations of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the Intensive Care Unit.

Methods: This was a cross-sectional cohort study based on the application of an electronic questionnaire focused on sedation practices.

Results: A total of 303 critical care physicians provided responses to the survey. Most respondents reported routine use of a structured sedation scale (281; 92.6%). Almost half of the respondents reported performing daily interruptions of sedation (147; 48.4%), and the same percentage of participants (48.0%) agreed that patients are often over sedated. During the COVID-19 pandemic, participants reported that patients had a higher chance of receiving midazolam compared to before the pandemic (178; 58.8% versus 106; 34.0%; p = 0.05), and heavy sedation was more common during the COVID-19 pandemic (241; 79.4% versus 148; 49.0%; p = 0.01).

Conclusion: This survey provides valuable data on the perceived attitudes of Brazilian intensive care physicians regarding sedation. Although daily interruption of sedation was a well-known concept and sedation scales were often used by the respondents, insufficient effort was put into frequent monitoring, use of protocols and systematic implementation of sedation strategies. Despite the perception of the benefits linked with light sedation, there is a need to identify improvement targets to propose educational strategies to improve current practices.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对机械通气患者使用轻度镇静剂的看法和做法:关于巴西重症监护医生态度的调查。
目的目的:了解机械通气患者对轻度镇静药物干预的知识和认知态度,并了解目前的实践与《重症监护病房成人患者疼痛、躁动/镇静、谵妄、不活动和睡眠障碍的预防和管理临床实践指南》的建议相比存在的差距:这是一项横断面队列研究,采用电子问卷调查镇静方法:共有 303 名重症监护医生回答了调查。大多数受访者表示常规使用结构化镇静量表(281 人;92.6%)。近一半的受访者表示每天都会中断镇静(147 人;48.4%),同样比例的参与者(48.0%)也认为患者经常镇静过度。在 COVID-19 大流行期间,受访者称与大流行前相比,患者接受咪达唑仑治疗的几率更高(178;58.8% 对 106;34.0%;P = 0.05),而在 COVID-19 大流行期间,过度镇静更为常见(241;79.4% 对 148;49.0%;P = 0.01):这项调查为了解巴西重症监护医生对镇静剂的认知态度提供了宝贵的数据。尽管每天中断镇静是一个众所周知的概念,受访者也经常使用镇静量表,但在频繁监测、使用规程和系统实施镇静策略方面所做的努力还不够。尽管人们认为轻度镇静有很多好处,但仍有必要确定改进目标,提出教育策略,以改善目前的做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva Medicine-Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
自引率
0.00%
发文量
114
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Patient-level costs of central line-associated bloodstream infections caused by multidrug-resistant microorganisms in a public intensive care unit in Brazil: a retrospective cohort study Critical COVID-19 and neurological dysfunction - a direct comparative analysis between SARS-CoV-2 and other infectious pathogens. Reply to: Epistaxis as a complication of high-flow nasal cannula therapy in adults. Robust, maintainable, emergency invasive mechanical ventilator. Erratum.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1