Search

Purpose: To assess the impact of different electronic relaxation devices on common stressful patient symptoms experienced in intensive care unit (ICU)., Methods: Sixty critically ill patients were enrolled in four relaxation sessions using a randomized cross-over design: standard relaxation (TV/radio), music therapy (MUSIC-CARE©), and two virtual reality systems using either real motion pictures (DEEPSEN©) or synthetic motion pictures (HEALTHY-MIND©). The goal was to determine which device was the best to reduce overall patient discomfort intensity (0-10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS); primary endpoint). Secondary endpoints were specific stressful symptoms (pain, anxiety, dyspnea, thirst, and lack of rest feeling) and stress response measured by Analgesia/Nociception Index (ANI). Multivariate mixed-effect analysis was used, taking into account patient characteristics and multiple measurements., Results: Fifty patients followed the full research protocol, and ten patients did at least one research planned session of relaxation. HEALTHY-MIND© was associated with a significant decrease in overall discomfort, the primary endpoint (median NRS = 4[2-6] vs. 2[0-5]; p = 0.01, mixed-effect model), accompanied by a significant decrease in stress response (increase in ANI, secondary endpoint; p < 0.01). Regarding other secondary endpoints, each of the two virtual reality systems was associated with a decrease in anxiety (p < 0.01), while HEALTHY-MIND© was associated also with a decrease in pain (p = 0.001) and DEEPSEN© with a decrease in lack of rest (p = 0.01). Three incidents (claustrophobia/dyspnea/agitation) were reported among 109 virtual reality sessions. Cybersickness was rare (NRS = 0[0-0])., Conclusion: Electronic relaxation therapy is a promising, safe, and effective non-pharmacological solution that can be used to improve overall discomfort in alert and non-delirious ICU patients. Its effectiveness depends on technical characteristics (virtual reality using a synthetic imagined world versus a real world or music therapy alone without virtual reality), as well as the type of symptoms., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Avoidance of excessive sedation and subsequent prolonged mechanical ventilation in intensive care units (ICUs) is recommended, but no data are available for critically ill postoperative patients. We hypothesised that in such patients stopping sedation immediately after admission to the ICU could reduce unnecessary sedation and improve patient outcomes., Methods: We did a randomised, parallel-group, clinical trial at three ICUs in France. Stratified randomisation with minimisation (1:1 via a restricted web platform) was used to assign eligible patients (aged ≥18 years, admitted to an ICU after abdominal surgery, and expected to require at least 12 h of mechanical ventilation because of a critical illness defined by a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score >1 for any organ, but without severe acute respiratory distress syndrome or brain injury) to usual sedation care provided according to recommended practices (control group) or to immediate interruption of sedation (intervention group). The primary outcome was the time to successful extubation (defined as the time from randomisation to the time of extubation [or tracheotomy mask] for at least 48 h). All patients who underwent randomisation (except for those who were excluded after randomisation) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01486121., Findings: Between Dec 2, 2011, and Feb 27, 2014, 137 patients were randomly assigned to the control (n=68) or intervention groups (n=69). In the intention-to-treat analysis, time to successful extubation was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (median 8 h [IQR 4-36] vs 50 h [29-93], group difference -33·6 h [95% CI -44·9 to -22·4]; p<0·0001). The adjusted hazard ratio was 5·2 (95% CI 3·1-8·8, p<0·0001)., Interpretation: Immediate interruption of sedation in critically ill postoperative patients with organ dysfunction who were admitted to the ICU after abdominal surgery improved outcomes compared with usual sedation care. These findings support interruption of sedation in these patients following transfer from the operating room., Funding: Délégation à la Recherche Clinique et à l'Innovation du Groupement de Coopération Sanitaire de la Mission d'Enseignement, de Recherche, de Référence et d'Innovation (DRCI-GCS-MERRI) de Montpellier-Nîmes., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Delirium is common in Intensive-Care-Unit (ICU) patients but under-recognized by bed-side clinicians when not using validated delirium-screening tools. The Confusion-Assessment-Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) has demonstrated very good psychometric properties, and has been translated into many different languages though not into French. We undertook this opportunity to describe the translation process., Material and Methods: The translation was performed following recommended guidelines. The updated method published in 2014 including introduction letters, worksheet and flowsheet for bed-side use, the method itself, case-scenarios for training and Frequently-Asked-Questions (32 pages) was translated into French language by a neuropsychological researcher who was not familiar with the original method. Then, the whole method was back-translated by a native English-French bilingual speaker. The new English version was compared to the original one by the Vanderbilt University ICU-delirium-team. Discrepancies were discussed between the two teams before final approval of the French version., Results: The entire process took one year. Among the 3692 words of the back-translated version of the method itself, 18 discrepancies occurred. Eight (44%) lead to changes in the final version. Details of the translation process are provided., Conclusions and Relevance: The French version of CAM-ICU is now available for French-speaking ICUs. The CAM-ICU is provided with its complete training-manual that was challenging to translate following recommended process. While many such translations have been done for other clinical tools, few have published the details of the process itself. We hope that the availability of such teaching material will now facilitate a large implementation of delirium-screening in French-speaking ICUs., (Copyright © 2017 Société française d'anesthésie et de réanimation (Sfar). All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To determine the short- and long-term mortality of obese ICU patients following medical as opposed to surgical admission and the relation between obesity and mortality. Design: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, using a propensity score–matched analysis of patients with medical or surgical admission. Setting: One French mixed medical-surgical ICU. Patients: Critically ill obese patients (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) and nonobese patients admitted during a 14-year period. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Seven-hundred ninety-one obese patients and 4,644 nonobese patients were included, 338 (43%) and 2,367 (51%) medical and 453 (57%) and 2,277 (49%) surgical obese and nonobese patients, respectively. Mortality was significantly higher in medical than in surgical obese patients in ICU (25% vs 12%; p < 0.001) and up to 365 days (36% vs 18%; p < 0.001) post ICU admission. One-to-one propensity score matching generated 260 pairs with well-balanced baseline characteristics. After matching on propensity score, mortality was still significantly higher in medical patients both in the ICU (21% vs 13%; p = 0.03) and up to 365 days (30% vs 20%; p = 0.01) post ICU admission. Obesity was not significantly associated with mortality both in univariate analysis (140 obese patients [15%] in the dead group vs 651 [14%] in the alive group; p = 0.72) and multivariate analysis (odds ratio, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.86–1.38]; p = 0.49) after adjustment for Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, age, category of admission, history of cardiac disease, and history of respiratory disease. Conclusions: After careful matching, the data suggest that ICU mortality in obese population was higher in the medical group than in the surgical group and remains significantly higher 365 days post ICU admission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Unlike wards, where chronic and acute pain are regularly managed, comparisons of the most commonly used self-report pain tools have not been reported for the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. The objective of this study was to compare the feasibility, validity and performance of the Visual Analog Scale (horizontal (VAS-H) and vertical (VAS-V) line orientation), the Verbal Descriptor Scale (VDS), the 0–10 oral Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-O) and the 0–10 visually enlarged laminated NRS (NRS-V) for pain assessment in critically ill patients. One hundred and eleven consecutive patients admitted into a medical-surgical ICU were included as soon as they became alert and were able to follow simple commands. Pain was measured using the 5 scales in a randomized order upon enrollment-(T1) and after-(T2) administration of an analgesic or, in absence of pain upon enrollment, after a nociceptive procedure. The rate of any response obtained both at T1 and T2 (success rate) was significantly higher for NRS-V (91%) compared with NRS-O (83%), VDS (78%), VAS-H (68%) and VAS-V (66%). Pain intensity changed significantly between T1 and T2, showing a good validity and responsiveness for the 5 scales, which correlated well between each other. The negative predictive value calculated from true and false negatives defined by real and false absence of pain was highest for NRS-V (90%). In conclusion, the NRS-V should be the tool of choice for the ICU setting, because it is the most feasible and discriminative self-report scale for measuring critically ill patients’ pain intensity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]