Toward Solving the Sedation-Assessment Conundrum: Bispectral Index Monitoring and Sedation Interruption

Music as Medicine: The Therapeutic Potential of Music for Acute Stroke Patients

Nurses caring for patients with acute stroke are likely to administer both music and medication with therapeutic intent. The administration of medication is based on accumulated scientific evidence and tailored to the needs of each patient. However, the therapeutic use of music is generally based on good intentions and anecdotal evidence. This review summarizes and examines the current literature regarding the effectiveness of music in the treatment of critically ill patients and the use of music in neurologically injured patients. The rationale for hypothesis-driven research to explore therapeutic music intervention in acute stroke is compelling.

Toward Solving the Sedation-Assessment Conundrum: Neurofunction Monitoring

The sedation-assessment conundrum is the struggle to balance the need for sedation against the need to awaken the patient and perform a neurologic examination. This article discusses the nuances of the sedation-assessment conundrum as well as approaches to resolve this and reduce the negative impact of abruptly stopping sedative infusions. Both oversedation and undersedation affect critically ill patients. This article discusses methods of assessing sedation and interpreting individualized patient responses to sedation. The use of neurofunction monitors and periods of sedation interruption are discussed within the context of addressing the sedation-assessment conundrum.

Nursing collaboration: a key element in debunking neurocritical care myths

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To explore the origin of myths and their progression toward dogma. The process of debunking myths in the neurocritical care unit (NCCU) is facilitated if nurses are involved early during the process.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current and past practices in the NCCU were reviewed through our personal experiences, followed by a literature review. Several myths and dogmas were identified, and the most prominent were explored regarding their origin and the work done to evaluate their validity or lack thereof. A cornerstone in the NCCU is intracranial pressure management, thus several of the myths revolve around this practice and cerebral perfusion pressure. Other myths and dogmas reviewed include the neurologic exam, perioperative scalp shaving, and nursing care.

SUMMARY

Myth and dogma are problems confronted in all of medicine and here we provide specific examples from the NCCU. Nursing care, especially in the ICU, can help identify these myths and, in conjunction with physicians, tests these myths via the scientific method instead of accepting the null hypothesis. Even when myths are proven false, changing clinical practice, altering physician or nurse behavior, and fighting dogma remain a challenge.

Exploring the impact of augmenting sedation assessment with physiologic monitors

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological sedation is a necessary tool in the management of critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients. The intensive care unit (ICU) sedation strategy is to use the least amount of medication to meet safety and comfort goals. Titration of pharmacological agents is currently guided by clinical assessment tools. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the addition of a neurophysiological monitor, bispectral index (BIS), aided the ICU nurse in reducing the amount of drug used, compared to a clinical tool alone, in a general critical care population.

METHODS

In this prospective clinical trial, mechanically ventilated adults (N=300) were randomised to sedation assessment using only the observational assessment tool (RASS) or a combination of observational and physiologic measures (RASS+BIS). Subjects were enrolled from a medical ICU (N=154), a trauma ICU (N=72) and a general mixed-use ICU (N=74).

RESULTS

BIS-augmented sedation was only associated with the reduction of drug use when patients were sedated with propofol or narcotic agents (propofol [1.61 mg/kg/h vs. 1.77 mg/kg/h; p<0.0001], fentanyl [54.73 mcg/h vs. 66.81 mcg/h; p<0.0001], and hydromorphone [0.97 mg/h vs. 4.00 mg/h: p<0.0001] compared to RASS alone. In contrast, patients sedated with dexmedetomidine or benzodiazepines were given higher doses under the BIS-augmented dexmedetomidine [0.46 mcg/kg/h vs. 0.33 mcg/kg/h; p<0.0001], lorazepam [4.13 mg/h vs. 3.29 mg/h p<0.0001], and midazolam [3.73 mg/h vs 2.86 mg/h; p<0.0001]) protocol compared to clinical assessment alone.

CONCLUSION

The clinical evaluation of depth of sedation remains the most reliable method for the titration of pharmacological sedation in the critical care unit. However, BIS-augmented assessment is helpful in reducing the amount of propofol and narcotic medication used and may be considered an adjunct when these agents are utilised.

A pilot study of cerebral and haemodynamic physiological changes during sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol in patients with acute brain injury

Sedation for the mechanically-ventilated, brain-injured patient remains challenging. The purpose of this pilot study was to compare the cerebral physiologic effects of sedation with propofol versus dexmedetomidine in mechanically-ventilated, brain-injured patients. Using a randomised, crossover, unblinded clinical trial, we enrolled patients with severe brain injury (Glasgow Coma Score ≤8) from traumatic injury, subarachnoid haemorrhage or intracerebral haemorrhage undergoing multimodal monitoring (intracranial pressure, brain temperature, oximetry and microdialysis). Patients received an infusion of either propofol or dexmedetomidine for six hours and then a crossover for the subsequent six hours after sufficient washout/in. Clinical and physiological measurements were recorded hourly. In eight patients, (four traumatic injury, three subarachnoid haemorrhage and one intracerebral haemorrhage), the mean dose of propofol used was 25.5 µg/kg/minute while the mean dose of dexmedetomidine was 0.54 µg/kg/hour. All subjects were effectively sedated to a goal of Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale -2 and Bispectral Index of 50-70 throughout the study period. We did not observe any statistically significant differences between the groups in systemic or cerebral physiologic metrics. Though differences were noted in cerebral metabolic substrates (lactate/pyruvate ratio), none were statistically significant. In our pilot cohort, dexmedetomidine and propofol appear equally effective in sedating severely brain-injured patients and neither is associated with adverse physiological effects as measured by multimodal monitoring. Larger long-term studies are required to determine whether clinically favourable benefits demonstrated in the medical critical care setting also apply to this patient population.

A randomized evaluation of bispectral index-augmented sedation assessment in neurological patients

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether monitoring sedation status using bispectral index (BIS) as an adjunct to clinical evaluation was associated with a reduction in the total amount of sedative drug used in a 12 h period.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.

SETTING

Tertiary care neurocritical care unit.

PATIENTS

Sixty-seven mechanically ventilated adult patients receiving continuous intravenous sedation with propofol.

INTERVENTIONS

Sedation monitoring using clinical assessment with the Ramsay scale (Ramsay-alone group) or clinical assessment plus BIS monitoring (BIS-augmentation group). Subjects were randomized to Ramsay-alone (n = 35), or BIS-augmentation (n = 32). Nurses adjusted the dose of propofol to a Ramsay of 4, or a Ramsay of 4 and BIS between 60 and 70.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patients in the BIS-augmentation group received significantly less propofol by volume (93.5 ml vs. 157.8 ml, respectively; P < .015), and had lower infusion rates (14.6 vs. 27.9 mcg/kg/min; P = .003). There is a lower risk of propofol infusion exceeding manufacturer's recommended dosing guides in the BIS-augmentation group versus the Ramsay-alone group (0 vs. 23%, P = .0052). The BIS-augmentation group woke up much quicker than those in the Ramsay-alone group (1.2 vs. 7.5 min; P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

BIS-augmented sedation monitoring resulted in a marked reduction in the total dose of sedative used to achieve the same level of clinical sedation resulting in shortened time to wake up without any measurable adverse effects. Physiologic sedation assessment tools may provide a useful means of improving the care of sedated critically ill patients.