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 f

/pdf/clinical-practice-guidelines-for-the-management-of-pain-4810wy3nml.pdf

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

Sedative medications are widely used in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Structured assessment of sedation and agitation is useful to titrate sedative medications and to evaluate agitated behavior, yet existing sedation scales have limitations. We measured inter-rater reliability and validity of a new 10-level (+4 “combative” to −5 “unarousable”) scale, the Richmond Agitation–Sedation Scale (RASS), in two phases. In phase 1, we demonstrated excellent (r = 0.956, lower 90% confidence limit = 0.948; κ = 0.73, 95% confidence interval = 0.71, 0.75) inter-rater reliability among five investigators (two physicians, two nurses, and one pharmacist) in adult ICU patient encounters (n = 192). Robust inter-rater reliability (r = 0.922–0.983) (κ = 0.64–0.82) was demonstrated for patients from medical, surgical, cardiac surgery, coronary, and neuroscience ICUs, patients with and without mechanical ventilation, and patients with and without sedative medications. In validity testing, RASS correlated highly (r = 0.93)...

https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1164/rccm.2107138

The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale Validity and Reliability in Adult Intensive Care Unit Patients

ContextIn the intensive care unit (ICU), delirium is a common yet underdiagnosed
form of organ dysfunction, and its contribution to patient outcomes is unclear.ObjectiveTo determine if delirium is an independent predictor of clinical outcomes,
including 6-month mortality and length of stay among ICU patients receiving
mechanical ventilation.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsProspective cohort study enrolling 275 consecutive mechanically ventilated
patients admitted to adult medical and coronary ICUs of a US university-based
medical center between February 2000 and May 2001. Patients were followed
up for development of delirium over 2158 ICU days using the Confusion Assessment
Method for the ICU and the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale.Main Outcome MeasuresPrimary outcomes included 6-month mortality, overall hospital length
of stay, and length of stay in the post-ICU period. Secondary outcomes were
ventilator-free days and cognitive impairment at hospital discharge.ResultsOf 275 patients, 51 (18.5%) had persistent coma and died in the hospital.
Among the remaining 224 patients, 183 (81.7%) developed delirium at some point
during the ICU stay. Baseline demographics including age, comorbidity scores,
dementia scores, activities of daily living, severity of illness, and admission
diagnoses were similar between those with and without delirium (P>.05 for all). Patients who developed delirium had higher 6-month
mortality rates (34% vs 15%, P = .03) and spent 10
days longer in the hospital than those who never developed delirium (P<.001). After adjusting for covariates (including age,
severity of illness, comorbid conditions, coma, and use of sedatives or analgesic
medications), delirium was independently associated with higher 6-month mortality
(adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-7.7; P = .008), and longer hospital stay (adjusted HR, 2.0;
95% CI, 1.4-3.0; P<.001). Delirium in the ICU
was also independently associated with a longer post-ICU stay (adjusted HR,
1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.3; P = .009), fewer median days
alive and without mechanical ventilation (19 [interquartile range, 4-23] vs
24 [19-26]; adjusted P = .03), and a higher incidence
of cognitive impairment at hospital discharge (adjusted HR, 9.1; 95% CI, 2.3-35.3; P = .002).ConclusionDelirium was an independent predictor of higher 6-month mortality and
longer hospital stay even after adjusting for relevant covariates including
coma, sedatives, and analgesics in patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/198503/JCE30038.pdf

Delirium as a predictor of mortality in mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit

http://staff.washington.edu/vane/Readings/Girard-AwakeBreathingControlledTrial-Lancet2008.pdf

Efficacy and safety of a paired sedation and ventilator weaning protocol for mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care (Awakening and Breathing Controlled trial): a randomised controlled trial

ContextGoal-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.ObjectiveTo test the reliability and validity of the Richmond Agitation-Sedation
Scale (RASS).DesignProspective cohort study.SettingAdult medical and coronary ICUs of a university-based medical center.ParticipantsThirty-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.Main Outcome MeasuresInterrater 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.ResultsIn 290-paired observations by nurses, results of both the RASS and RS
demonstrated excellent interrater reliability (weighted κ, 0.91 and
0.94, respectively), which were both superior to the GCS (weighted κ,
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.ConclusionsThe 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.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/196696/JCE20052.pdf

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

Judith Jacobi, PharmD, FCCM, BCPS; Gilles L. Fraser, PharmD, FCCM; Douglas B. Coursin, MD; Richard R. Riker, MD; Dorrie Fontaine, RN, DNSc, FAAN; Eric T. Wittbrodt, PharmD; Donald B. Chalfin, MD, MS, FCCM; Michael F. Masica, MD, MPH; H. Scott Bjerke, MD; William M. Coplin, MD; David W. Crippen, MD, FCCM; Barry D. Fuchs, MD; Ruth M. Kelleher, RN; Paul E. Marik, MDBCh, FCCM; Stanley A. Nasraway, Jr, MD, FCCM; Michael J. Murray, MD, PhD, FCCM; William T. Peruzzi, MD, FCCM; Philip D. Lumb, MB, BS, FCCM. Developed through the Task Force of the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) of the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), in collaboration with the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP), and in alliance with the American College of Chest Physicians; and approved by the Board of Regents of ACCM and the Council of SCCM and the ASHP Board of Directors

/pdf/clinical-practice-guidelines-for-the-sustained-use-of-550x8gqibj.pdf

William T. Peruzzi

Papers

Clinical practice guidelines for the sustained use of sedatives and analgesics in the critically ill adult.