scholarly journals The Efficacy of Eye Masks and Earplugs Interventions for Sleep Promotion in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leila Karimi ◽  
Farshid Rahimi-Bashar ◽  
Seyyede Momeneh Mohammadi ◽  
Mohsen Mollahadi ◽  
Masoum Khosh-Fetrat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sleep Quality ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Sleep Time ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Quasi Experimental

Using physical devices such as eye masks and earplugs to improve to the quality of sleep in intensive care units (ICUs) is a very important issue. This study was conducted to assess the efficacy of eye masks and earplugs for sleep promotion in critically ill adult patients in the ICU based on various sleep quality assessment tools. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest were systematically retrieved until May 2021. Both randomized and non-randomized experimental and quasi-experimental studies were included if they evaluated the efficacy of eye masks and earplugs interventions on sleep outcomes in critically ill patients. The methodological quality was assessed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tool. For the main outcome (sleep quality), a mean difference (MD) and confidence intervals (CIs) of 95% were determined. A total of 2,687 participants from 35 studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty one studies were included in meta-analysis and 14 studies were included in the qualitative analysis. According to the results based on sleep quality assessment tools; overall scores of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ), eye mask and/or earplug interventions have a positive effect on sleep quality. Based on Verran-Snyder-Halpern Sleep Scale (VSHSS), sleep disturbance was significantly lower in the intervention groups. In terms of polysomnography, the use of eye masks and/or earplugs resulted in a significant increase in total sleep time, sleep efficiency, rapid eye movement (REM) time, significant reduction of awaking, and sleep arousals index. The results of the present study suggest that the use of earplugs or eye masks, separately or combined affects sleep improvement in critically ill patients.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=145830, PROSPERO: CRD42020145830.

scholarly journals The Impact of Pain Assessment on Critically Ill Patients’ Outcomes: A Systematic Review

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evanthia Georgiou ◽  
Maria Hadjibalassi ◽  
Ekaterini Lambrinou ◽  
Panayiota Andreou ◽  
Elizabeth D. E. Papathanassoglou
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Pain Assessment ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
The Impact

In critically ill patients, pain is a major problem. Efficient pain management depends on a systematic, comprehensive assessment of pain. We aimed to review and synthesize current evidence on the impact of a systematic approach to pain assessment on critically ill patients’ outcomes. A systematic review of published studies (CINAHL, PUBMED, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and COCHRANE databases) with predetermined eligibility criteria was undertaken. Methodological quality was assessed by the EPHPP quality assessment tool. A total of 10 eligible studies were identified. Due to big heterogeneity, quantitative synthesis was not feasible. Most studies indicated the frequency, duration of pain assessment, and types of pain assessment tools. Methodological quality assessment yielded “strong” ratings for 5/10 and “weak” ratings for 3/10 studies. Implementation of systematic approaches to pain assessment appears to associate with more frequent documented reports of pain and more efficient decisions for pain management. There was evidence of favorable effects on pain intensity, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, mortality, adverse events, and complications. This systematic review demonstrates a link between systematic pain assessment and outcome in critical illness. However, the current level of evidence is insufficient to draw firm conclusions. More high quality randomized clinical studies are needed.

scholarly journals Diagnostic Performance of Delirium Assessment Tools in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mu‐Hsing Ho ◽  
Amy Montgomery ◽  
Victoria Traynor ◽  
Chia‐Chi Chang ◽  
Ken N. Kuo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Delirium Assessment

scholarly journals Effect of timing of intubation on clinical outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized cohort studies

Critical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleni Papoutsi ◽  
Vassilis G. Giannakoulis ◽  
Eleni Xourgia ◽  
Christina Routsi ◽  
Anastasia Kotanidou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
Icu Admission ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Detectable Difference

Abstract Background Although several international guidelines recommend early over late intubation of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), this issue is still controversial. We aimed to investigate the effect (if any) of timing of intubation on clinical outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 by carrying out a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods PubMed and Scopus were systematically searched, while references and preprint servers were explored, for relevant articles up to December 26, 2020, to identify studies which reported on mortality and/or morbidity of patients with COVID-19 undergoing early versus late intubation. “Early” was defined as intubation within 24 h from intensive care unit (ICU) admission, while “late” as intubation at any time after 24 h of ICU admission. All-cause mortality and duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) were the primary outcomes of the meta-analysis. Pooled risk ratio (RR), pooled mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random effects model. The meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020222147). Results A total of 12 studies, involving 8944 critically ill patients with COVID-19, were included. There was no statistically detectable difference on all-cause mortality between patients undergoing early versus late intubation (3981 deaths; 45.4% versus 39.1%; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.99–1.15, p = 0.08). This was also the case for duration of MV (1892 patients; MD − 0.58 days, 95% CI − 3.06 to 1.89 days, p = 0.65). In a sensitivity analysis using an alternate definition of early/late intubation, intubation without versus with a prior trial of high-flow nasal cannula or noninvasive mechanical ventilation was still not associated with a statistically detectable difference on all-cause mortality (1128 deaths; 48.9% versus 42.5%; RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.99–1.25, p = 0.08). Conclusions The synthesized evidence suggests that timing of intubation may have no effect on mortality and morbidity of critically ill patients with COVID-19. These results might justify a wait-and-see approach, which may lead to fewer intubations. Relevant guidelines may therefore need to be updated.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document