Aaron M. Joffe

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium in Adult Patients in the Intensive Care Unit

Objective:To revise the “Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Sustained Use of Sedatives and Analgesics in the Critically Ill Adult” published in Critical Care Medicine in 2002. Methods:The American College of Critical Care Medicine assembled a 20-person, multidisciplinary, multi-institutional task force with expertise in guideline development, pain, agitation and sedation, delirium management, and associated outcomes in adult critically ill patients. The task force, divided into four subcommittees, collaborated over 6 yr in person, via teleconferences, and via electronic communication. Subcommittees were responsible for developing relevant clinical questions, using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org) to review, evaluate, and summarize the literature, and to develop clinical statements (descriptive) and recommendations (actionable). With the help of a professional librarian and Refworks® database software, they developed a Web-based electronic database of over 19,000 references extracted from eight clinical search engines, related to pain and analgesia, agitation and sedation, delirium, and related clinical outcomes in adult ICU patients. The group also used psychometric analyses to evaluate and compare pain, agitation/sedation, and delirium assessment tools. All task force members were allowed to review the literature supporting each statement and recommendation and provided feedback to the subcommittees. Group consensus was achieved for all statements and recommendations using the nominal group technique and the modified Delphi method, with anonymous voting by all task force members using E-Survey (http://www.esurvey.com). All voting was completed in December 2010. Relevant studies published after this date and prior to publication of these guidelines were referenced in the text. The quality of evidence for each statement and recommendation was ranked as high (A), moderate (B), or low/very low (C). The strength of recommendations was ranked as strong (1) or weak (2), and either in favor of (+) or against (–) an intervention. A strong recommendation (either for or against) indicated that the intervention’s desirable effects either clearly outweighed its undesirable effects (risks, burdens, and costs) or it did not. For all strong recommendations, the phrase “We recommend …” is used throughout. A weak recommendation, either for or against an intervention, indicated that the trade-off between desirable and undesirable effects was less clear. For all weak recommendations, the phrase “We suggest …” is used throughout. In the absence of sufficient evidence, or when group consensus could not be achieved, no recommendation (0) was made. Consensus based on expert opinion was not used as a substitute for a lack of evidence. A consistent method for addressing potential conflict of interest was followed if task force members were coauthors of related research. The development of this guideline was independent of any industry funding. Conclusion:These guidelines provide a roadmap for developing integrated, evidence-based, and patient-centered protocols for preventing and treating pain, agitation, and delirium in critically ill patients.

A Validated Approach to Evaluating Psychometric Properties of Pain Assessment Tools for Use in Nonverbal Critically Ill Adults

A valid pain assessment is the foundation of adequate pain management. Pain assessment can be challenging, especially in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients who are unable to self-report. In such situations, relying on observational assessment tools is an alternative strategy. This review describes and analyzes the development and psychometric properties of pain assessment tools developed for use with nonverbal critically ill adults. A total of 32 relevant papers that described the psychometric properties of eight pain assessment tools were included. The scale development process, psychometric properties (i.e., reliability and validity), and feasibility of pain assessment tools were analyzed using a 0 to 20 scoring system. Each pain assessment tool was scored independently by two reviewers. Of the eight behavioral pain scales developed for use in adult ICU patients, the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) and the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) are considered to be the most valid and reliable for this purpose, according to the available evidence. Behavioral pain scales may be viable alternatives to assessing pain in ICU patients who are unable to self-report, but only valid, reliable, and feasible scales should be used for this purpose.

Preliminary report on cardiac dysfunction after isolated traumatic brain injury.

Objective:The aim of this study was to examine cardiac dysfunction during the first 2 weeks after isolated traumatic brain injury and its association with in-hospital mortality. DesignRetrospective. SettingLevel 1 regional trauma center. PatientsAdult patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Methods:After institutional review board approval, data from adult patients with isolated traumatic brain injury who underwent echocardiography during the first 2 weeks after traumatic brain injury between 2003 and 2010 were examined. Patients with preexisting cardiac disease were excluded. Clinical characteristics and echocardiogram reports were abstracted. Cardiac dysfunction was defined as left ventricular ejection fraction less than 50% or presence of regional wall motion abnormality. Interventions:None. Measurement and Main Results:We examined data from 139 patients with isolated traumatic brain injury who underwent echocardiographic evaluation. Patients were 58 ± 20 years old, 66% were male patients, and 62.6% had subdural hematoma; admission Glasgow Coma Scale score was 3 ± 1 (3–15) and head Abbreviated Injury Scale was 4 ± 1 (2–5). Of this cohort, 22.3% had abnormal echocardiogram: reduced left ventricular ejection fraction was documented in 12% (left ventricular ejection fraction, 43% ± 8%) and 17.5% of patients had a regional wall motion abnormality. Hospital day 1 was the most common day of echocardiographic exam. Abnormal echocardiogram was independently associated with all cause in-hospital mortality (9.6 [2.3–40.2]; p = 0.002). Conclusions:Cardiac dysfunction in the setting of isolated traumatic brain injury occurs and is associated with increased in-hospital mortality. This finding raises the question as to whether there are uncharted opportunities for a more timely recognition of cardiac dysfunction and subsequent optimization of the hemodynamic management of these patients.

Occurrence and complications of tracheal reintubation in critically ill adults.

BACKGROUND: Timing and preparation for tracheal extubation are as critical as the initial intubation. There are limited data on specific strategies for a planned extubation. The extent to which the difficult airway at reintubation contributes to patient morbidity is unknown. The aim of the present study was to describe the occurrence and complications of failed extubation and associated risk factors, and to estimate the mortality and morbidity associated with reintubation attempts. METHODS: Cohort study of 2,007 critically ill adult patients admitted to the ICU with an ETT. Patients were classified in 2 groups, based on the requirement for reintubation: “never reintubated” versus “≥ 1 reintubations.” Baseline characteristics, ICU and hospital stay, hospital mortality, and in-patient costs were compared between patients successfully extubated and those with reintubation outside the operating room, using regression techniques. Reasons, airway management techniques, and complications of intubation and reintubation were summarized descriptively. RESULTS: 376 patients (19%) required reintubation, and 230 (11%) were reintubated within 48 hours, primarily due to respiratory failure. Patients requiring reintubation were older, more likely to be male, and had higher admission severity score. Difficult intubation and complications were similar for initial and subsequent intubation. Reintubation was associated with a 5-fold increase in the relative odds of death (adjusted odds ratio 5.86, 95% CI 3.87–8.89, P < .01), and a 2-fold increase in median ICU and hospital stay, and institutional costs. Difficult airway at reintubation was associated with higher mortality (adjusted odds ratio 2.23, 95% CI 1.01–4.93, P = .05). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 20% of critically ill patients required out of operating room reintubation. Reintubation was associated with higher mortality, stay, and cost. Moreover, a difficult airway at reintubation was associated with higher mortality.

Predictors of Reintubation in Critically Ill Patients

BACKGROUND: Assessment of a patients readiness for removal of the endotracheal tube in the ICU is based on respiratory, airway, and neurological measures. However, nearly 20% of patients require reintubation. We created a prediction model for the need for reintubation, which incorporates variables importantly contributing to extubation failure. METHODS: This was a cohort study of 2,007 endotracheally intubated subjects who required ICU admission at a tertiary care center. Data collection included demographic, hemodynamic, respiratory, and neurological variables preceding extubation. Data were compared between subjects extubated successfully and those who required reintubation, using bivariate logistic regression models, with the binary outcome reintubation and the baseline characteristics as predictors. Multivariable logistic regression analysis with robust variance was used to build the prediction model. RESULTS: Of the 2,007 subjects analyzed, 376 (19%) required reintubation. In the bivariate analysis, admission Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, minute ventilation, breathing frequency, oxygenation, number of prior SBTs, rapid shallow breathing index, airway-secretions suctioning frequency and quantity, heart rate, and diastolic blood pressure differed significantly between the extubation success and failure groups. In the multivariable analysis, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II and suctioning frequency were associated with failed extubation. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.68 for failure at any time, and 0.71 for failure within 24 hours. However, prior failed SBT, minute ventilation, and diastolic blood pressure were additional independent predictors of failure at any time, whereas oxygenation predicted extubation failure within 24 hours. CONCLUSIONS: A small number of independent variables explains a substantial portion of the variability of extubation failure, and can help identify patients at high risk of needing reintubation. These characteristics should be incorporated in the decision-making process of ICU extubation.

Head-Elevated Patient Positioning Decreases Complications of Emergent Tracheal Intubation in the Ward and Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND:Based on the data from elective surgical patients, positioning patients in a back-up head-elevated position for preoxygenation and tracheal intubation can improve patient safety. However, data specific to the emergent setting are lacking. We hypothesized that back-up head-elevated positioning would be associated with a decrease in complications related to tracheal intubation in the emergency room environment. METHODS:This retrospective study was approved by the University of Washington Human Subjects Division (Seattle, WA). Eligible patients included all adults undergoing emergent tracheal intubation outside of the operating room by the anesthesiology-based airway service at 2 university-affiliated teaching hospitals. All intubations were through direct laryngoscopy for an indication other than full cardiopulmonary arrest. Patient characteristics and details of the intubation procedure were derived from the medical record. The primary study endpoint was the occurrence of a composite of any intubation-related complication: difficult intubation, hypoxemia, esophageal intubation, or pulmonary aspiration. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of the primary endpoint in the supine versus back-up head-elevated positions with adjustment for a priori-defined potential confounders (body mass index and a difficult intubation prediction score [Mallampati, obstructive sleep Apnea, Cervical mobility, mouth Opening, Coma, severe Hypoxemia, and intubation by a non-Anesthesiologist score]). RESULTS:Five hundred twenty-eight patients were analyzed. Overall, at least 1 intubation-related complication occurred in 76 of 336 (22.6%) patients managed in the supine position compared with 18 of 192 (9.3%) patients managed in the back-up head-elevated position. After adjusting for body mass index and the Mallampati, obstructive sleep Apnea, Cervical mobility, mouth Opening, Coma, severe Hypoxemia, and intubation by a non-Anesthesiologist score, the odds of encountering the primary endpoint during an emergency tracheal intubation in a back-up head-elevated position was 0.47 (95% confidence interval, 0.26–0.83; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Placing patients in a back-up head-elevated position, compared with supine position, during emergency tracheal intubation was associated with a reduced odds of airway-related complications.

Evaluation and treatment of pain in critically ill adults.

Pain is experienced by the overwhelming majority of patients during their intensive care unit stay, but it remains an underappreciated problem. To effectively treat pain, it must be detected and quantified using a validated assessment tool. It is acknowledged that optimal pain relief may be difficult to achieve given the complex interplay of coexisting medical conditions and the environment in which care is provided. Nonetheless, by following structured approaches to pain, resource consumption may be reduced, and even improved survival may be realized. This review covers practices and techniques specific to addressing and treating pain in the adult intensive care environment. Traditional pharmacological approaches including opiate and nonopiate medications are reviewed, as are regional anesthetic techniques and nonpharmacological approaches used for controlling pain.

The air-Q(®) intubating laryngeal airway vs the LMA-ProSeal(TM) : a prospective, randomised trial of airway seal pressure.

We performed a prospective, open‐label, randomised controlled trial comparing the air‐Q® against the LMA‐ProSeal™ in adults undergoing general anaesthesia. One hundred subjects (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1–3) presenting for elective, outpatient surgery were randomly assigned to 52 air‐Q® and 48 ProSeal devices. The primary study endpoint was airway seal pressure. Oropharyngolaryngeal morbidity was assessed secondarily. Mean (SD) airway seal pressures for the air‐Q® and ProSeal were 30 (7) cmH2O and 30 (6) cmH2O, respectively (p = 0.47). Postoperative sore throat was more common with the air‐Q® (46% vs 38%, p = 0.03) as was pain on swallowing (30% vs 5%, p = 0.01). In conclusion, the air‐Q® performs well as a primary airway during the maintenance of general anaesthesia with an airway seal pressure similar to that of the ProSeal, but with a higher incidence of postoperative oropharyngolaryngeal complaints.

A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Ramped Position vs Sniffing Position During Endotracheal Intubation of Critically Ill Adults

BACKGROUND: Hypoxemia is the most common complication during endotracheal intubation of critically ill adults. Intubation in the ramped position has been hypothesized to prevent hypoxemia by increasing functional residual capacity and decreasing the duration of intubation, but has never been studied outside of the operating room. METHODS: Multicenter, randomized trial comparing the ramped position (head of the bed elevated to 25°) with the sniffing position (torso supine, neck flexed, and head extended) among 260 adults undergoing endotracheal intubation by pulmonary and critical care medicine fellows in four ICUs between July 22, 2015, and July 19, 2016. The primary outcome was lowest arterial oxygen saturation between induction and 2 minutes after intubation. Secondary outcomes included Cormack‐Lehane grade of glottic view, difficulty of intubation, and number of laryngoscopy attempts. RESULTS: The median lowest arterial oxygen saturation was 93% (interquartile range [IQR], 84%‐99%) with the ramped position vs 92% (IQR, 79%‐98%) with the sniffing position (P = .27). The ramped position appeared to increase the incidence of grade III or IV view (25.4% vs 11.5%, P = .01), increase the incidence of difficult intubation (12.3% vs 4.6%, P = .04), and decrease the rate of intubation on the first attempt (76.2% vs 85.4%, P = .02), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter trial, the ramped position did not improve oxygenation during endotracheal intubation of critically ill adults compared with the sniffing position. The ramped position may worsen glottic view and increase the number of laryngoscopy attempts required for successful intubation. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02497729; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov

Utilization and impact on fellowship training of non-physician advanced practice providers in intensive care units of academic medical centers: a survey of critical care program directors☆ , ☆☆ ,★

BACKGROUND Non-physician advanced practice providers (APPs) such as nurse practitioners and physician assistants are being increasingly utilized as critical care providers in the United States. The objectives of this study were to determine the utilization of APPs in the intensive care units (ICU)s of academic medical centers (AMCs) and to assess the perceptions of critical care fellowship program directors (PDs) regarding the impact of these APPs on fellowship training. METHODS A cross-sectional national survey questionnaire was distributed to program directors of 331 adult Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-approved critical care fellowship training programs (internal medicine, anesthesiology and surgery) in US AMCs. RESULTS We received 124 (37.5%) PD responses. Of these, 81 (65%) respondents indicated that an APP was part of the care team in either the primary ICU or any ICU in which the fellow trained. The majority of respondents reported that patient care was positively affected by APPs with nearly two-thirds of PDs reporting that fellowship training was also positively impacted. CONCLUSIONS Our survey revealed that APPs are utilized in a large number of US AMCs with critical care training programs. Program director respondents believed that patient care and fellowship training were positively impacted by APPs.