69
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Management of Sepsis

      journal-article
      Massachusetts Medical Society

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      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

          New England Journal of Medicine, 355(16), 1699-1713

          Related collections

          Most cited references83

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

          The pathophysiology and treatment of sepsis.

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

            Monitoring sedation status over time in ICU patients: reliability and validity of the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS).

            Goal-directed delivery of sedative and analgesic medications is recommended as standard care in intensive care units (ICUs) because of the impact these medications have on ventilator weaning and ICU length of stay, but few of the available sedation scales have been appropriately tested for reliability and validity. To test the reliability and validity of the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS). Prospective cohort study. Adult medical and coronary ICUs of a university-based medical center. Thirty-eight medical ICU patients enrolled for reliability testing (46% receiving mechanical ventilation) from July 21, 1999, to September 7, 1999, and an independent cohort of 275 patients receiving mechanical ventilation were enrolled for validity testing from February 1, 2000, to May 3, 2001. Interrater reliability of the RASS, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), and Ramsay Scale (RS); validity of the RASS correlated with reference standard ratings, assessments of content of consciousness, GCS scores, doses of sedatives and analgesics, and bispectral electroencephalography. In 290-paired observations by nurses, results of both the RASS and RS demonstrated excellent interrater reliability (weighted kappa, 0.91 and 0.94, respectively), which were both superior to the GCS (weighted kappa, 0.64; P<.001 for both comparisons). Criterion validity was tested in 411-paired observations in the first 96 patients of the validation cohort, in whom the RASS showed significant differences between levels of consciousness (P<.001 for all) and correctly identified fluctuations within patients over time (P<.001). In addition, 5 methods were used to test the construct validity of the RASS, including correlation with an attention screening examination (r = 0.78, P<.001), GCS scores (r = 0.91, P<.001), quantity of different psychoactive medication dosages 8 hours prior to assessment (eg, lorazepam: r = - 0.31, P<.001), successful extubation (P =.07), and bispectral electroencephalography (r = 0.63, P<.001). Face validity was demonstrated via a survey of 26 critical care nurses, which the results showed that 92% agreed or strongly agreed with the RASS scoring scheme, and 81% agreed or strongly agreed that the instrument provided a consensus for goal-directed delivery of medications. The RASS demonstrated excellent interrater reliability and criterion, construct, and face validity. This is the first sedation scale to be validated for its ability to detect changes in sedation status over consecutive days of ICU care, against constructs of level of consciousness and delirium, and correlated with the administered dose of sedative and analgesic medications.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Daily interruption of sedative infusions in critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation.

              Conous infusions of sedative drugs in the intensive care unit may prolong the duration of mechanical ventilation, prolong the length of stay in the intensive care unit and the hospital, impede efforts to perform daily neurologic examinations, and increase the need for tests to assess alterations in mental status. Whether regular interruption of such infusions might accelerate recovery is not known. We conducted a randomized, controlled trial involving 128 adult patients who were receiving mechanical ventilation and continuous infusions of sedative drugs in a medical intensive care unit. In the intervention group, the sedative infusions were interrupted until the patients were awake, on a daily basis; in the control group, the infusions were interrupted only at the discretion of the clinicians in the intensive care unit. The median duration of mechanical ventilation was 4.9 days in the intervention group, as compared with 7.3 days in the control group (P=0.004), and the median length of stay in the intensive care unit was 6.4 days as compared with 9.9 days, respectively (P=0.02). Six of the patients in the intervention group (9 percent) underwent diagnostic testing to assess changes in mental status, as compared with 16 of the patients in the control group (27 percent, P=0.02). Complications (e.g., removal of the endotracheal tube by the patient) occurred in three of the patients in the intervention group (4 percent) and four of the patients in the control group (7 percent, P=0.88). In patients who are receiving mechanical ventilation, daily interruption of sedative-drug infusions decreases the duration of mechanical ventilation and the length of stay in the intensive care unit.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Massachusetts Medical Society
                2006
                19 October 2006
                21 April 2019
                Article
                10.1056/NEJMRA043632
                17050894
                a97d9e64-b1f2-4c92-82b7-63731d6d52c5
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article