Pilot Study on Pairing Sedation Strategies and Weaning

Acute Respiratory Failure Clinical Trial

Official title: Comparing Strategies of Pairing Sedation and Weaning Protocols on Outcomes of Mechanical Ventilation: A Pilot Study

Status Completed

Clinical Trial Summary

A three-arm, randomized, pilot feasibility, study to assess the effect three validated sedation strategies on outcomes of patient on mechanical ventilation.

Clinical Trial Description

A three-arm, randomized, pilot feasibility, study to assess the effect three validated sedation strategies on outcomes of patient on mechanical ventilation. A significant proportion of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) require mechanical ventilation (MV). To maintain comfort and facilitate quality care, large quantities of sedatives and analgesics are often administered either by continuous infusion, with or without daily interruption (DI) of sedation, or as intermittent doses of analgesics. Three validated sedation strategies are currently available. A recently published study ( trial has shown that instituting protocol-directed sedation in patients requiring continuous infusion of sedatives and analgesics, whether or not daily interruption (DI) of the sedative occurs, will improve MV outcomes, specifically the duration of MV. Girard et al performed a randomized, multicenter, clinical trial (ABC- Awakening and Breathing Controlled trial) evaluating the pairing of a spontaneous awakening trial (SAT) with an SBT. Most recently, a Danish study by Strom et al. investigated whether an analgesia-first approach to patient comfort that consisted of intermittent doses of intravenous opioids, and the initiation of IV sedation for short periods only when acute agitation was present, would be superior to a protocol similar to the ABC trial. While the three above mentioned approaches are accepted and currently implemented in the critical care community there is no comparative study or evaluation on the optimal timing to conduct a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) for assessing weaning readiness with each of these strategies. It is possible that a SAT strategy, where sedative and opioid infusions are interrupted, may lead to more agitation and anxiety than a strategy in patients managed with a sedation protocol where intravenous sedative and analgesic therapy is regularly titrated to maintain patients in a lightly sedated state. Moreover, it remains unclear whether there are advantages of an analgesia-first sedation strategy over either an SAT or sedation protocol strategy in terms of the time it takes to wean patients from MV. However, it is noteworthy to mention that the analgesia-first strategy was associated with more delirium episodes, which were attributed to the ability to assess for it in a more awake patient. However, comparing delirium occurrence in studies with different sedation goals and methodologies may be inaccurate. The investigators therefore propose a three-arm, randomized, pilot feasibility, study to assess the effect of these three (3) validated strategies for sedation and pain management ;

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Acute Respiratory Failure
• Respiratory Insufficiency

• NCT number: NCT02219659
• Study type: Interventional
• Source: MemorialCare Health System
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: December 2014
• Completion date: May 2017