Effect of Nonsedation on Cognitive Function in Survivors of Critical Illness

Long-Term Cognitive Function Among Critical Illness Survivors

Cognitive impairment is common after critical illness and persists beyond the period of acute illness. Clinicians caring for this patient population are encouraged to screen for cognitive impairment and provide supportive measures to mitigate its distressing effects. Further research is needed to evaluate the laboratory and neuroimaging correlates of post-intensive care unit (ICU) cognitive impairment, which may in turn lead to personalized interventions to address this debilitating complication of critical illness. Further research is needed to evaluate the laboratory and neuroimaging correlates of post-ICU cognitive impairment, which may, in turn, lead to personalized interventions to address this debilitating complication of critical illness.

Management of pain and sedation in the intensive care unit

Advances in our approach to treating pain and sedation when caring for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) have been propelled by decades of robust trial data, knowledge gained from patient experiences, and our evolving understanding of how pain and sedation strategies affect patient survival and long term outcomes. These data contribute to current practice guidelines prioritizing analgesia-first sedation strategies (analgosedation) that target light sedation when possible, use of short acting sedatives, and avoidance of benzodiazepines. Together, these strategies allow the patient to be more awake and able to participate in early mobilization and family interactions. The covid-19 pandemic introduced unique challenges in the ICU that affected delivery of best practices and patient outcomes. Compliance with best practices has not returned to pre-covid levels. After emerging from the pandemic and refocusing our attention on optimal pain and sedation management in the ICU, it is imperative to revisit the data that contributed to our current recommendations, review the importance of best practices on patient outcomes, and consider new strategies when advancing patient care.

Patients' experiences of cognitive impairment following critical illness treated in an intensive care unit: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Treatment with modern technology in an intensive care unit has increased critical illness survival. However, many patients are affected by their critical illness for months or years following discharge, as they experience cognitive impairments. Long-term cognitive impairments can severely affect patients' quality of life. Exploring patients' experiences on how and which cognitive impairments affect their everyday lives is important to improve planning of relevant research into interventions that may alleviate the burden of post-intensive cognitive impairments.

AIM

To review the literature on patients' experiences of cognitive impairment following critical illness treated in an intensive care unit.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cinahl, PsycInfo and Embase in March-May 2021. References and citations in relevant studies were explored. The Covidence tool was used by two independent researchers to identify relevant studies for inclusion. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for critical appraisal. The JBI methodology for scoping reviews and the PRISMA-ScR checklist were used (Supporting Information File 1).

RESULTS

We identified 11 relevant qualitative and/or quantitative studies. Four themes were found: 'Experiencing poor memory', 'Managing everyday life', 'Unsupported by the healthcare system' and 'Strategies for support in recovery'. Patients used various strategies during their recovery and rehabilitation to regain independence and avoid being a burden. They needed information to support their recovery and rehabilitation; otherwise, they felt unsupported and betrayed by the healthcare system.

CONCLUSION

Patients experienced various cognitive impairments following critical illness in the intensive care unit, affecting and challenging their quality of life and adaption to everyday life.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Knowledge gained by exploring patients' experience of cognitive impairments following critical illness in the intensive care unit can contribute to improve clinical practice by targeting and optimising patients' rehabilitation process.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public involvement in this scoping review.

Long-term neurocognitive outcomes after pediatric intensive care: exploring the role of drug exposure

BACKGROUND

Concerns exist regarding the impact of widely used clinical drugs on brain development. This study investigates long-term neurocognitive functioning in relation to frequently used drug exposure at the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU).

METHODS

This study compared children aged 6-12 years with previous PICU admission (age ≤1 year) for bronchiolitis requiring mechanical ventilation (patient group, n = 65) to a demographically comparable control group (n = 76) on a broad range of neurocognitive outcomes. The patient group was selected because bronchiolitis seldom manifests neurologically and is therefore not expected to affect neurocognitive functioning in itself. The relation between exposure to sedatives, analgesics and anesthetics and neurocognitive outcomes was assessed by regression analyses.

RESULTS

The patient group had lower intelligence than the control group (p < 0.001, d = -0.59) and poorer performance in neurocognitive functions; i.e., speed and attention (p = 0.03, d = -0.41) and verbal memory (p < 0.001, d = -0.60). Exposure to sedatives, analgesics and anesthetics was not related to neurocognitive outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with PICU admission for bronchiolitis requiring mechanical ventilation are at risk of adverse neurocognitive outcomes. This study found no evidence for a role of exposure to sedatives, analgesics or anesthetics. Findings underline the importance of long-term follow-up after PICU admission, even in the absence of disease with neurological manifestation.

IMPACT

Animal studies have indicated that exposing the maturing brain to clinical drugs may cause neurodegeneration. Clinical studies show mixed evidence regarding the association between clinical drugs and neurocognitive outcomes. This study provides evidence for considerably lower neurocognitive functioning among children with a history of PICU admission for bronchiolitis compared to healthy peers. Bronchiolitis seldom manifests neurologically and is therefore not expected to affect neurocognitive functioning in itself. We found no evidence supporting a relation between drug exposure (i.e., sedatives, analgesics and anesthetics) and long-term neurocognitive outcomes. Findings underline the importance of structured follow-up after PICU admission.

Patients' experiences of cognitive impairment following critical illness: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Critical illness and admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) can affect patients for months or years following discharge as many suffer from cognitive impairment. Long-term cognitive impairment affects patients' quality of life and ability to adapt to everyday life. Exploring their experiences on how and which cognitive impairments are affecting their everyday lives facilitates planning of relevant research on interventions that may serve to alleviate the burden of post-ICU cognitive impairment. The objective of this scoping review is to map the existing research on patients' experiences of cognitive impairment following critical illness.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The methodology will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for scoping reviews. The databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Embase will be searched to identify studies appropriate for inclusion. Any peer-reviewed original studies meeting the inclusion criteria and include statements from adult patients about how they experience cognitive impairment following critical illness and ICU admission will be considered. Studies published in English and Scandinavian languages will be included, with no further geographical or cultural limitations. The included studies will be screened by two independent researchers using a standardised data extraction tool and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool will be used for critical appraisal. The results will be presented in a tabular form, and data will be supported by narrative descriptions or a narrative summary.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Since the scoping review methodology aims at synthetising existing research on patients' experiences of cognitive impairment following critical illness, the scoping review does not require ethical approval. The results will be disseminated though a peer-reviewed publication in a scientific journal.

Effect of sedation with inhaled anaesthetics on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes in critically ill adults: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has renewed interest in the use of inhaled anaesthetics for sedation of ventilated critically ill patients. Preliminary data show that inhaled anaesthetics reduce lung inflammation, time to extubation and intensive care unit length of stay compared with intravenous sedatives. However, the impact of inhaled anaesthetics on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes is not well described in this setting. Randomised controlled trials are underway to establish if inhaled anaesthetics affect these and other patient and health system outcomes. Our aim is to summarise the known effects of inhaled sedatives on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this systematic review, we will use MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO to identify studies from 1970 to 2021 that assessed cognitive and psychiatric outcomes in critically ill adult patients sedated with inhaled anaesthetics. We will include case series, observational and cohort studies and randomised controlled trials. We will exclude case studies due to the heterogeneity of reporting in these studies. For randomised controlled trials comparing inhaled to intravenous sedation, we will report cognitive and psychiatric outcomes for both study arms. Studies will be selected based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist. Data will be extracted using a standardised data extraction tool by two independent reviewers. Studies will be assessed for bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised controlled trials, or the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort and case-control studies. Findings will be reported according to outcome and descriptive statistics will be used to illustrate findings in a narrative fashion.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The systematic review uses published data and therefore does not require ethics approval. Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentation at conferences related to the field.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021236455.

Failure of non-sedation strategy in critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients - a retrospective, post-hoc analysis of the NONSEDA trial

PURPOSE

There is a growing awareness on minimizing sedation in ICUs. In the NONSEDA trial 700 critically ill patients were randomized to light sedation or non-sedation during mechanical ventilation. Approximately 40% of patients randomized to non-sedation needed sedation. The aim of this study is to obtain knowledge on patients, who experienced failure of non-sedation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study is a retrospective post-hoc analysis of the NONSEDA trial. Patients, who were randomized to non-sedation are sub-divided into those who did not require sedation during mechanical ventilation ("non-sedation success"), and those who needed continuous sedation at least once ("non-sedation failure").

RESULTS

348 patients were randomized to non-sedation, 199 experienced non-sedation success, whereas 149 experienced non-sedation failure. Patients in the two groups were comparable with regards to age, BMI, disease severity scores and admission diagnoses. Patients with non-sedation failure were more often male. Propofol was mainly used as rescue sedation. Patients with non-sedation failure had less days alive without sedation, coma, delirium, organ support, mechanical ventilation, ICU- and hospital admission. Mortality and long-term outcomes did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients with non-sedation success had better in-hospital outcomes, but mortality and long-term outcomes were not affected by success or failure of non-sedation.