Literature DB >> 10342511

Comparison of five sedation scoring systems by means of auditory evoked potentials.

A M Schulte-Tamburen1, J Scheier, J Briegel, D Schwender, K Peter.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To review five sedation scoring systems and to determine their correlation with an objective method for assessing the level of sedation by means of auditory evoked potentials (AEP) in critically ill patients.
DESIGN: Prospective clinical study.
SETTING: Multidisciplinary intensive care unit in a university hospital. PATIENTS: Ninety-five consecutive patients requiring sedation during intensive care therapy. MEASUREMENTS AND
RESULTS: Previous studies have shown that auditory evoked potentials, especially latencies of the midlatency component N(b), could serve as an indicator of depth of anaesthesia. In the present study we used this electrophysiological method to evaluate sedation during intensive care therapy. Changes in latency of peak N(b) were compared with various levels of sedation assessed by five established sedation scoring systems. As in anaesthesia, latencies of N(b) increased with increasing depth of sedation. Among the scoring systems, the one developed by Ramsay correlated best with changes in N(b) latency (r2=0.68). The coefficient of determination, r2, of the other scores ranged from 0.56 to 0.61.
CONCLUSION: For the assessment of sedation, several scoring systems have been introduced into clinical practice, but the differentiation of deeper sedation levels, especially, remains poor. In this study we compared auditory evoked potentials, as an objective method with which to assess the level of sedation, with five different sedation scoring systems. In comparison with changes in latency of the midlatency component N(b), Ramsay's sedation score showed the closest correlation. Objective electrophysiological monitoring is desirable during long-term sedation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10342511     DOI: 10.1007/s001340050861

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Intensive Care Med        ISSN: 0342-4642            Impact factor:   17.440


  12 in total

1.  N100 auditory potential and electroencephalogram discriminate propofol-induced sedation levels.

Authors:  Heidi Yppärilä; Ikka Korhonen; Mika Tarvainen; Tadeusz Musialowicz; Stephan M Jakob; Juhani Partanen
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.502

2.  Population pharmacodynamic modelling of lorazepam- and midazolam-induced sedation upon long-term continuous infusion in critically ill patients.

Authors:  Eleonora L Swart; Klaas P Zuideveld; Joost de Jongh; Meindert Danhof; Lambertus G Thijs; Robert M J Strack van Schijndel
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2006-01-20       Impact factor: 2.953

3.  Prediction of responses to various stimuli during sedation: a comparison of three EEG variables.

Authors:  Matsuyuki Doi; Koji Morita; Haralambos Mantzaridis; Shigehito Sato; Gavin N C Kenny
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2004-12-01       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Dexmedetomidine versus Propofol: Is One Better Than the Other for MRI Sedation in Children?

Authors:  Sheikh S Ahmed; Tamara L Unland; James E Slaven; Mara E Nitu
Journal:  J Pediatr Intensive Care       Date:  2016-06-24

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

Authors:  Daiwai M Olson; Suzanne M Thoyre; Eric D Peterson; Carmelo Graffagnino
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2009-01-29       Impact factor: 3.210

Review 6.  Monitored anaesthesia care in the elderly: guidelines and recommendations.

Authors:  Margaret Ekstein; Doron Gavish; Tiberiu Ezri; Avi A Weinbroum
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.923

7.  Assessing sedation in critically ill children by bispectral index, auditory-evoked potentials and clinical scales.

Authors:  Adelaida Lamas; Jesús López-Herce; Luis Sancho; Santiago Mencía; Angel Carrillo; Maria José Santiago; Vicente Martínez
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2008-07-04       Impact factor: 17.440

8.  To evaluate the efficacy of intrathecal magnesium sulphate for hysterectomy under subarachnoid block with bupivacaine and fentanyl: A prospective randomized double blind clinical trial.

Authors:  Mridu Paban Nath; Rakesh Garg; Tapan Talukdar; Dipika Choudhary; Anulekha Chakrabarty
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2012-07

Review 9.  Instruments for monitoring intensive care unit sedation.

Authors:  G Carrasco
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2000-07-13       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 10.  Clinical review: agitation and delirium in the critically ill--significance and management.

Authors:  Jean-Claude Chevrolet; Philippe Jolliet
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.097

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.