重症监护中镇痛和镇静药物的推荐剂量导致血液中潜在毒性浓度的发生率较低

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Upsala journal of medical sciences Pub Date : 2024-05-09 DOI:10.48101/ujms.v129.10560
U. Lennborn, A. Johansson, Erik Lindgren, Elisabet I. Nielsen, Håkan Sandler, Maria Bertilsson, R. Kronstrand, Johan Ahlner, F. Kugelberg, Sten Rubertsson
{"title":"重症监护中镇痛和镇静药物的推荐剂量导致血液中潜在毒性浓度的发生率较低","authors":"U. Lennborn, A. Johansson, Erik Lindgren, Elisabet I. Nielsen, Håkan Sandler, Maria Bertilsson, R. Kronstrand, Johan Ahlner, F. Kugelberg, Sten Rubertsson","doi":"10.48101/ujms.v129.10560","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Standard dosages of analgesic and sedative drugs are given to intensive care patients. The resulting range of blood concentrations and corresponding clinical responses need to be better examined. The purpose of this study was to describe daily dosages, measured blood concentrations, and clinical responses in critically ill patients. The purpose was also to contribute to establishing whole blood concentration reference values of the drugs investigated. \nMethods: A descriptive study of prospectively collected data from 302 admissions to a general intensive care unit (ICU) at a university hospital. Ten drugs (clonidine, fentanyl, morphine, dexmedetomidine, ketamine, ketobemidone, midazolam, paracetamol, propofol, and thiopental) were investigated, and daily dosages recorded. Blood samples were collected twice daily, and drug concentrations were measured. Clinical responses were registered using Richmond agitation-sedation scale (RASS) and Numeric rating scale (NRS). \nResults: Drug dosages were within recommended dose ranges. Blood concentrations for all 10 drugs showed a wide variation within the cohort, but only 3% were above therapeutic interval where clonidine (57 of 122) and midazolam (38 of 122) dominated. RASS and NRS were not correlated to drug concentrations. \nConclusion: Using recommended dose intervals for analgesic and sedative drugs in the ICU setting combined with regular monitoring of clinical responses such as RASS and NRS leads to 97% of concentrations being below the upper limit in the therapeutic interval. This study contributes to whole blood drug concentration reference values regarding these 10 drugs.","PeriodicalId":23458,"journal":{"name":"Upsala journal of medical sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Recommended dosages of analgesic and sedative drugs in intensive care result in a low incidence of potentially toxic blood concentrations\",\"authors\":\"U. Lennborn, A. Johansson, Erik Lindgren, Elisabet I. Nielsen, Håkan Sandler, Maria Bertilsson, R. Kronstrand, Johan Ahlner, F. Kugelberg, Sten Rubertsson\",\"doi\":\"10.48101/ujms.v129.10560\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Standard dosages of analgesic and sedative drugs are given to intensive care patients. The resulting range of blood concentrations and corresponding clinical responses need to be better examined. The purpose of this study was to describe daily dosages, measured blood concentrations, and clinical responses in critically ill patients. The purpose was also to contribute to establishing whole blood concentration reference values of the drugs investigated. \\nMethods: A descriptive study of prospectively collected data from 302 admissions to a general intensive care unit (ICU) at a university hospital. Ten drugs (clonidine, fentanyl, morphine, dexmedetomidine, ketamine, ketobemidone, midazolam, paracetamol, propofol, and thiopental) were investigated, and daily dosages recorded. Blood samples were collected twice daily, and drug concentrations were measured. Clinical responses were registered using Richmond agitation-sedation scale (RASS) and Numeric rating scale (NRS). \\nResults: Drug dosages were within recommended dose ranges. Blood concentrations for all 10 drugs showed a wide variation within the cohort, but only 3% were above therapeutic interval where clonidine (57 of 122) and midazolam (38 of 122) dominated. RASS and NRS were not correlated to drug concentrations. \\nConclusion: Using recommended dose intervals for analgesic and sedative drugs in the ICU setting combined with regular monitoring of clinical responses such as RASS and NRS leads to 97% of concentrations being below the upper limit in the therapeutic interval. This study contributes to whole blood drug concentration reference values regarding these 10 drugs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23458,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Upsala journal of medical sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Upsala journal of medical sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.48101/ujms.v129.10560\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Upsala journal of medical sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.48101/ujms.v129.10560","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:重症监护病人服用标准剂量的镇痛和镇静药物。由此产生的血药浓度范围和相应的临床反应需要更好地研究。本研究的目的是描述重症患者的每日用药量、测得的血药浓度和临床反应。目的还在于为建立所研究药物的全血浓度参考值做出贡献。研究方法对某大学附属医院普通重症监护室(ICU)收治的 302 名住院病人的前瞻性数据进行描述性研究。研究了十种药物(氯尼丁、芬太尼、吗啡、右美托咪定、氯胺酮、酮贝米酮、咪达唑仑、扑热息痛、异丙酚和硫喷妥),并记录了每日用量。每天收集两次血样,测量药物浓度。使用里士满躁动镇静量表(RASS)和数字评分量表(NRS)记录临床反应。研究结果药物剂量均在推荐剂量范围内。队列中所有 10 种药物的血药浓度差异很大,但只有 3% 的药物高于治疗间隔,其中以氯苯胍(122 例中有 57 例)和咪达唑仑(122 例中有 38 例)为主。RASS 和 NRS 与药物浓度无关。结论在重症监护室环境中使用镇痛和镇静药物的推荐剂量间隔,并定期监测 RASS 和 NRS 等临床反应,可使 97% 的药物浓度低于治疗间隔的上限。这项研究为这 10 种药物的全血药物浓度参考值做出了贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Recommended dosages of analgesic and sedative drugs in intensive care result in a low incidence of potentially toxic blood concentrations
Background: Standard dosages of analgesic and sedative drugs are given to intensive care patients. The resulting range of blood concentrations and corresponding clinical responses need to be better examined. The purpose of this study was to describe daily dosages, measured blood concentrations, and clinical responses in critically ill patients. The purpose was also to contribute to establishing whole blood concentration reference values of the drugs investigated. Methods: A descriptive study of prospectively collected data from 302 admissions to a general intensive care unit (ICU) at a university hospital. Ten drugs (clonidine, fentanyl, morphine, dexmedetomidine, ketamine, ketobemidone, midazolam, paracetamol, propofol, and thiopental) were investigated, and daily dosages recorded. Blood samples were collected twice daily, and drug concentrations were measured. Clinical responses were registered using Richmond agitation-sedation scale (RASS) and Numeric rating scale (NRS). Results: Drug dosages were within recommended dose ranges. Blood concentrations for all 10 drugs showed a wide variation within the cohort, but only 3% were above therapeutic interval where clonidine (57 of 122) and midazolam (38 of 122) dominated. RASS and NRS were not correlated to drug concentrations. Conclusion: Using recommended dose intervals for analgesic and sedative drugs in the ICU setting combined with regular monitoring of clinical responses such as RASS and NRS leads to 97% of concentrations being below the upper limit in the therapeutic interval. This study contributes to whole blood drug concentration reference values regarding these 10 drugs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Upsala journal of medical sciences
Upsala journal of medical sciences 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences is published for the Upsala Medical Society. It has been published since 1865 and is one of the oldest medical journals in Sweden. The journal publishes clinical and experimental original works in the medical field. Although focusing on regional issues, the journal always welcomes contributions from outside Sweden. Specially extended issues are published occasionally, dealing with special topics, congress proceedings and academic dissertations.
期刊最新文献
Personality vulnerability to depression, resilience, and depressive symptoms: epigenetic markers among perinatal women. Anatomical and subcortical invasiveness in diffuse low-grade astrocytomas differ between IDH status and provide prognostic information. The risk of hemochromatosis among first- and second-generation immigrants: a cohort study of the total population in Sweden Nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 activation in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats normalize renal hemodynamics and oxygen consumption Central obesity and fat-free mass are associated with a larger spleen volume in the general population.
×
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