18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Organizational factors associated with target sedation on the first 48 h of mechanical ventilation: an analysis of checklist-ICU database

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Although light sedation levels are associated with several beneficial outcomes for critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation, the majority of patients are still deeply sedated. Organizational factors may play a role on adherence to light sedation levels. We aimed to identify organizational factors associated with a moderate to light sedation target on the first 48 h of mechanical ventilation, as well as the association between early achievement of within-target sedation and mortality.

          Methods

          This study is a secondary analysis of a multicenter two-phase study (prospective cohort followed by a cluster-randomized controlled trial) performed in 118 Brazilian ICUs. We included all critically ill patients who were on mechanical ventilation 48 h after ICU admission.

          A moderate to light level of sedation or being alert and calm (i.e., the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale of − 3 to 0) was the target for all patients on mechanical ventilation during the study period. We collected data on the type of hospital (public, private, profit and private, nonprofit), hospital teaching status, nursing and physician staffing, and presence of sedation, analgesia, and weaning protocols. We used multivariate random-effects regression with ICU and study phase as random-effects and correction for patients’ Simplified Acute Physiology Score 3 and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment. We also performed a mediation analysis to explore whether sedation level was just a mediator of the association between organizational factors and mortality.

          Results

          We included 5719 patients. Only 1710 (29.9%) were on target sedation levels on day 2. Board-certified intensivists on the morning and afternoon shifts were associated with an adequate sedation level on day 2 (OR = 2.43; CI 95%, 1.09–5.38). Target sedation levels were associated with reduced hospital mortality (OR = 0.63; CI 95%, 0.55–0.72). Mediation analysis also suggested such an association, but did not suggest a relationship between the physician staffing model and hospital mortality.

          Conclusions

          Board-certified intensivists on morning and afternoon shifts were associated with an increased number of patients achieving lighter sedation goals. These findings reinforce the importance of organizational factors, such as intensivists’ presence, as a modifiable quality improvement target.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-019-2323-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Generalized Collinearity Diagnostics

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effect of early vs late tracheostomy placement on survival in patients receiving mechanical ventilation: the TracMan randomized trial.

            Tracheostomy is a widely used intervention in adult critical care units. There is little evidence to guide clinicians regarding the optimal timing for this procedure. To test whether early vs late tracheostomy would be associated with lower mortality in adult patients requiring mechanical ventilation in critical care units. An open multicentered randomized clinical trial conducted between 2004 and 2011 involving 70 adult general and 2 cardiothoracic critical care units in 13 university and 59 nonuniversity hospitals in the United Kingdom. Of 1032 eligible patients, 909 adult patients breathing with the aid of mechanical ventilation for less than 4 days and identified by the treating physician as likely to require at least 7 more days of mechanical ventilation. Patients were randomized 1:1 to early tracheostomy (within 4 days) or late tracheostomy (after 10 days if still indicated). The primary outcome measure was 30-day mortality and the analysis was by intention to treat. Of the 455 patients assigned to early tracheostomy, 91.9% (95% CI, 89.0%-94.1%) received a tracheostomy and of 454 assigned to late tracheostomy, 44.9% (95% CI, 40.4%-49.5%) received a tracheostomy. All-cause mortality 30 days after randomization was 30.8% (95% CI, 26.7%-35.2%) in the early and 31.5% (95% CI, 27.3%-35.9%) in the late group (absolute risk reduction for early vs late, 0.7%; 95% CI, -5.4% to 6.7%). Two-year mortality was 51.0% (95% CI, 46.4%-55.6%) in the early and 53.7% (95% CI, 49.1%-58.3%) in the late group (P = .74). Median critical care unit length of stay in survivors was 13.0 days in the early and 13.1 days in the late group (P = .74). Tracheostomy-related complications were reported for 6.3% (95% CI, 4.6%-8.5%) of patients (5.5% in the early group, 7.8% in the late group). For patients breathing with the aid of mechanical ventilation treated in adult critical care units in the United Kingdom, tracheostomy within 4 days of critical care admission was not associated with an improvement in 30-day mortality or other important secondary outcomes. The ability of clinicians to predict which patients required extended ventilatory support was limited. isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN28588190.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The effect of multidisciplinary care teams on intensive care unit mortality.

              Critically ill patients are medically complex and may benefit from a multidisciplinary approach to care. We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of medical patients admitted to Pennsylvania acute care hospitals (N = 169) from July 1, 2004, to June 30, 2006, linking a statewide hospital organizational survey to hospital discharge data. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the independent relationship between daily multidisciplinary rounds and 30-day mortality. A total of 112 hospitals and 107 324 patients were included in the final analysis. Overall 30-day mortality was 18.3%. After adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics, multidisciplinary care was associated with significant reductions in the odds of death (odds ratio [OR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.93 [P = .001]). When stratifying by intensivist physician staffing, the lowest odds of death were in intensive care units (ICUs) with high-intensity physician staffing and multidisciplinary care teams (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68-0.89 [P < .001]), followed by ICUs with low-intensity physician staffing and multidisciplinary care teams (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97 [P = .01]), compared with hospitals with low-intensity physician staffing but without multidisciplinary care teams. The effects of multidisciplinary care were consistent across key subgroups including patients with sepsis, patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, and patients in the highest quartile of severity of illness. Daily rounds by a multidisciplinary team are associated with lower mortality among medical ICU patients. The survival benefit of intensivist physician staffing is in part explained by the presence of multidisciplinary teams in high-intensity physician-staffed ICUs.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                paulo.nassar@accamargo.org.br
                fzampieri@hcor.com.br
                jorgesalluh@gmail.com
                bozza.fernando@gmail.com
                frmachado@unifesp.br
                hpenna@hcor.com.br
                ldamiani@hcor.com.br
                abiasi@hcor.com.br
                Journal
                Crit Care
                Critical Care
                BioMed Central (London )
                1364-8535
                1466-609X
                29 January 2019
                29 January 2019
                2019
                : 23
                : 34
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0437 1183, GRID grid.413320.7, Intensive Care Unit and Postgraduate Program, , A.C. Camargo Cancer Center, ; São Paulo, Brazil
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0454 243X, GRID grid.477370.0, Research Institute, HCor-Hospital do Coração, ; São Paulo, Brazil
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0386 8219, GRID grid.414358.f, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, ; São Paulo, Brazil
                [4 ]GRID grid.472984.4, Graduate Program in Translational Medicine and Department of Critical Care, , D’Or Institute for Research and Education, ; Rio De Janeiro, Brazil
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2294 473X, GRID grid.8536.8, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Clinica médica, , Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, ; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
                [6 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0723 0931, GRID grid.418068.3, Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ), Instituto D’Or de Pesquisa e Ensino (IDOR), ; Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
                [7 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0514 7202, GRID grid.411249.b, Anesthesiology, Pain and Intensive Care Department, , Federal University of São Paulo, ; São Paulo, Brazil
                [8 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0514 7202, GRID grid.411249.b, Federal univeristy of São Paulo, ; São Paulo, Brazil
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0522-7445
                Article
                2323
                10.1186/s13054-019-2323-y
                6352335
                30696474
                8abfdac1-45f6-4cb0-8194-fd0bd46c30d3
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 7 November 2018
                : 11 January 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100006506, Ministério da Saúde;
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Emergency medicine & Trauma
                conscious sedation,critical care,deep sedation,mechanical ventilation,outcome and process assessment

                Comments

                Comment on this article