alexa Effect of a nursing-implemented sedation protocol on the duration of mechanical ventilation.
Clinical Research

Clinical Research

Journal of Clinical Trials

Author(s): Brook AD, Ahrens TS, Schaiff R, Prentice D, Sherman G

Abstract Share this page

Abstract OBJECTIVE: To compare a practice of protocol-directed sedation during mechanical ventilation implemented by nurses with traditional non-protocol-directed sedation administration. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled clinical trial. SETTING: Medical intensive care unit (19 beds) in an urban teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Patients requiring mechanical ventilation (n = 321). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either protocol-directed sedation (n = 162) or non-protocol-directed sedation (n = 159). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The median duration of mechanical ventilation was 55.9 hrs (95\% confidence interval, 41.0-90.0 hrs) for patients managed with protocol-directed sedation and 117.0 hrs (95\% confidence interval, 96.0-155.6 hrs) for patients receiving non-protocol-directed sedation. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that patients in the protocol-directed sedation group had statistically shorter durations of mechanical ventilation than patients in the non-protocol-directed sedation group (chi-square = 7.00, p = .008, log rank test; chi-square = 8.54, p = .004, Wilcoxon's test; chi-square = 9.18, p = .003, -2 log test). Lengths of stay in the intensive care unit (5.7+/-5.9 days vs. 7.5+/-6.5 days; p = .013) and hospital (14.0+/-17.3 days vs. 19.9+/-24.2 days; p < .001) were also significantly shorter among patients in the protocol-directed sedation group. Among the 132 patients (41.1\%) receiving continuous intravenous sedation, those in the protocol-directed sedation group (n = 66) had a significantly shorter duration of continuous intravenous sedation than those in the non-protocol-directed sedation group (n = 66) (3.5+/-4.0 days vs. 5.6+/-6.4 days; p = .003). Patients in the protocol-directed sedation group also had a significantly lower tracheostomy rate compared with patients in the non-protocol-directed sedation group (10 of 162 patients [6.2\%] vs. 21 of 159 patients [13.2\%], p = .038). CONCLUSIONS: The use of protocol-directed sedation can reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation, the intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay, and the need for tracheostomy among critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure.

  • To read the full article Visit
  • Subscription
This article was published in Crit Care Med and referenced in Journal of Clinical Trials

Relevant Expert PPTs

Relevant Speaker PPTs

Recommended Conferences

Relevant Topics

Peer Reviewed Journals
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version