Sedation in intensive care: An audit of the effect of airway and sedation choice on ward round sedation scores

2010 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 183
Author(s):  
P. McConnell ◽  
C. MacNeil ◽  
P. Docherty
Author(s):  
Aisling Walsh ◽  
Rachelle Booth ◽  
Kalindi Rajani ◽  
Lynne Cochrane ◽  
Mark Peters ◽  
...  

Our paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) performs active surveillance for prescribing errors and detects a mean of 1.66 with an SD of 0.18 total prescription errors per occupied bed day. The primary aim of this project was to reduce the number of prescribing errors in PICU. The secondary aims were to improve the workflow in the unit and reduce the time staff spent on medication queries/prescribing. We introduced a daily multidisciplinary prescribing round to our PICU. Prescribing errors reduced, with the mean number of total prescription errors per bed day falling from 1.66 (0.18) to 1.19 (0.13), the mean number of clinical prescription errors per bed day falling from 0.46 (0.09) to 0.3 (0.07), and the mean number of non-clinical prescribing errors per bed day falling from 1.12 (0.15) to 0.67 (0.1). Forty-eight staff responded to the survey, 39 of whom had been directly involved in the rounds. The majority (37 of 39; 95%) said the prescribing round reduced the overall time they spent on prescribing/medication queries during their shift, and 9 of 10 (90%) prescribers said that they were interrupted fewer times for medication queries while doing other tasks. Almost all (47 of 48; 98%) said that they thought the prescribing ward round should continue. Introduction of a prescribing round with senior medical and pharmacist involvement was associated with a reduction in prescribing errors as well as reduction in the overall time staff spent on medication queries and prescribing. The round was well received by staff, with 98% wanting it to continue.


2007 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 218-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew L. Masica ◽  
Timothy D. Girard ◽  
Grant R. Wilkinson ◽  
Jason W.W. Thomason ◽  
Brenda Truman Pun ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 115
Author(s):  
Sarah Jones ◽  
Janine Bothe ◽  
Kush Deshpande

2020 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-156
Author(s):  
Kelsey L. Ohman ◽  
Jennifer M. Schultheis ◽  
Shawn J. Kram ◽  
Christopher E. Cox ◽  
Daniel L. Gilstrap ◽  
...  

Background: Quetiapine is an atypical antipsychotic that is commonly used in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The utility of quetiapine as a sedative adjunct has not yet been evaluated, but has been described previously in studies evaluating quetiapine for delirium or delirium prophylaxis. Objective: To determine if adjunctive use of quetiapine reduces sedative dosage requirements among mechanically ventilated adults without delirium. Methods: This retrospective intrapatient comparator study included all mechanically ventilated adults admitted to a medical ICU who received quetiapine between July 1, 2013, and July 1, 2018. The primary outcome was the change in sedative dosage requirements over 24 hours following quetiapine initiation. Secondary outcomes included change in sedative dosage requirements 48 hours postquetiapine initiation, opioid dosage requirements 24 hours postquetiapine initiation, percent time at goal for both pain and sedation scores, depth of sedation, and QTc. Results: A total of 57 patients were included in the study cohort. There was no significant difference in 24-hour cumulative doses of propofol ( P = 0.10), dexmedetomidine ( P = 0.14), or benzodiazepines ( P = 0.14). During the 48-hour treatment period, there was a significant increase in dexmedetomidine requirements ( P = 0.03). There were no differences in 24-hour opioid dosage requirements, percent time at goal pain or sedation scores, depth of sedation, or QTc following quetiapine initiation. Conclusion and Relevance: Adjunctive use of quetiapine was not associated with a significant reduction in sedative dosage requirements 24 or 48 hours following initiation among mechanically ventilated adults without delirium.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. e000449
Author(s):  
Claire Caldwell ◽  
Victoria MacBean ◽  
Katie Hunt ◽  
Anne Greenough

ObjectivesTo ascertain parental views regarding taking part in neonatal unit ward rounds.DesignA service evaluation project.SettingTertiary neonatal intensive care unit.PatientsParent(s) of infants receiving care on the neonatal unit.InterventionsStructured interviews conducted at the cot side.Main outcome measuresParents were asked if they knew when ward rounds occurred, whether they had attended ward rounds and if they had not what were the factors inhibiting them from doing so, their experience of attending ward rounds and whether they were concerned about issues of confidentiality.Results23 of 24 consecutive parents agreed to be interviewed. The median age of their infants was 14 (range 3 – 123) days when they were interviewed. Eighty-five per cent were able to identify when a nursing handover or doctor’s ward round occurred. Seventy-five per cent of parents had attended at least one ward round and the median score in terms of usefulness was 5 out of 5. Reasons for not attending included time and cost to travel to the unit, their partners were working and having other children. Parents volunteered that the nurses proactively updated them as soon as they arrived, hence making regular attendance less important. Regarding confidentiality, 85% were not concerned if other people overheard information about their baby, unless the news was bad.ConclusionsParents recognised the value of attending ward rounds and generally found it a positive experience, but emphasised limitations on their ability to attend.


1994 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 201-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Friesdorf ◽  
S. Konichezky ◽  
F. Gross-Alltag ◽  
G. Federolf ◽  
B. Schwilk ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document