Alyson M. Esteves PharmD, BCPS, BCCCP , Kalle J. Fjeld MD , Andre S. Yonan PharmD , Matthew A. Roginski MD, MPH
{"title":"重症监护转运中使用神经肌肉阻断剂与插管无关","authors":"Alyson M. Esteves PharmD, BCPS, BCCCP , Kalle J. Fjeld MD , Andre S. Yonan PharmD , Matthew A. Roginski MD, MPH","doi":"10.1016/j.amj.2024.03.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Variable indications exist for neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) in the critical care transport setting beyond facilitation of intubation.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This retrospective cohort study included adult patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent critical care transport from July 1, 2020, to May 2, 2023, and received NMBAs during transport that was not associated with intubation. The primary outcome was the indication for NMBA administration. Secondary outcomes included the characterization of NMBA use, mean Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale score before NMBA administration, sedation strategy used, and continuation of NMBAs within 48 hours of hospital admission.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>One hundred twenty-six patients met the inclusion criteria. The most common indication for NMBA administration was ventilator dyssynchrony (n = 71, 56.4%). The majority of patients received rocuronium during transport (n = 113, 89.7%). The mean pre-NMBA Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale score was −3.7 ± 2.4. The most common sedation strategy was a combination of continuous infusion and bolus sedatives (76.2%). One hundred (79.4%) patients had sedation changes in response to NMBA administration. Seventy-two (57.1%) received NMBAs during the first 48 hours of their intensive care unit admission.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>NMBAs were frequently administered for ventilator dyssynchrony and continuation of prior therapy. Optimization opportunities exist to ensure adequate deep sedation and reassessment of NMBA indication.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":35737,"journal":{"name":"Air Medical Journal","volume":"43 4","pages":"Pages 328-332"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neuromuscular Blocking Agent Use in Critical Care Transport Not Associated With Intubation\",\"authors\":\"Alyson M. Esteves PharmD, BCPS, BCCCP , Kalle J. Fjeld MD , Andre S. Yonan PharmD , Matthew A. Roginski MD, MPH\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.amj.2024.03.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Variable indications exist for neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) in the critical care transport setting beyond facilitation of intubation.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This retrospective cohort study included adult patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent critical care transport from July 1, 2020, to May 2, 2023, and received NMBAs during transport that was not associated with intubation. The primary outcome was the indication for NMBA administration. Secondary outcomes included the characterization of NMBA use, mean Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale score before NMBA administration, sedation strategy used, and continuation of NMBAs within 48 hours of hospital admission.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>One hundred twenty-six patients met the inclusion criteria. The most common indication for NMBA administration was ventilator dyssynchrony (n = 71, 56.4%). The majority of patients received rocuronium during transport (n = 113, 89.7%). The mean pre-NMBA Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale score was −3.7 ± 2.4. The most common sedation strategy was a combination of continuous infusion and bolus sedatives (76.2%). One hundred (79.4%) patients had sedation changes in response to NMBA administration. Seventy-two (57.1%) received NMBAs during the first 48 hours of their intensive care unit admission.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>NMBAs were frequently administered for ventilator dyssynchrony and continuation of prior therapy. Optimization opportunities exist to ensure adequate deep sedation and reassessment of NMBA indication.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35737,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Air Medical Journal\",\"volume\":\"43 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 328-332\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Air Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1067991X24000531\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Air Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1067991X24000531","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
Neuromuscular Blocking Agent Use in Critical Care Transport Not Associated With Intubation
Objective
Variable indications exist for neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) in the critical care transport setting beyond facilitation of intubation.
Methods
This retrospective cohort study included adult patients (≥ 18 years) who underwent critical care transport from July 1, 2020, to May 2, 2023, and received NMBAs during transport that was not associated with intubation. The primary outcome was the indication for NMBA administration. Secondary outcomes included the characterization of NMBA use, mean Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale score before NMBA administration, sedation strategy used, and continuation of NMBAs within 48 hours of hospital admission.
Results
One hundred twenty-six patients met the inclusion criteria. The most common indication for NMBA administration was ventilator dyssynchrony (n = 71, 56.4%). The majority of patients received rocuronium during transport (n = 113, 89.7%). The mean pre-NMBA Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale score was −3.7 ± 2.4. The most common sedation strategy was a combination of continuous infusion and bolus sedatives (76.2%). One hundred (79.4%) patients had sedation changes in response to NMBA administration. Seventy-two (57.1%) received NMBAs during the first 48 hours of their intensive care unit admission.
Conclusion
NMBAs were frequently administered for ventilator dyssynchrony and continuation of prior therapy. Optimization opportunities exist to ensure adequate deep sedation and reassessment of NMBA indication.
期刊介绍:
Air Medical Journal is the official journal of the five leading air medical transport associations in the United States. AMJ is the premier provider of information for the medical transport industry, addressing the unique concerns of medical transport physicians, nurses, pilots, paramedics, emergency medical technicians, communication specialists, and program administrators. The journal contains practical how-to articles, debates on controversial industry issues, legislative updates, case studies, and peer-reviewed original research articles covering all aspects of the medical transport profession.