P Nydahl1, C Hermes, R Dubb, A Kaltwasser, D Schuchhardt. 1. Pflegeforschung, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Haus 31, Brunswiker Str. 10, 24105, Kiel, Deutschland, peter.nydahl@uksh.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Modern concepts for sedation and analgesia and guidelines recommend light analgesia and sedation, so that patients on mechanically ventilation are more awake, compared to previous concepts. Hence, these patients are more alert and able to experience their situation on the ventilator and their endotracheal tube (ETT). PROBLEM: There is currently no convincing evidence of how patients tolerate the tube under present conditions, which interventions could help them, or whether they want to be sedated deeper because of the tube. Based upon our own observations, a broad range of reactions are possible. PURPOSE: The tolerance of the ETT in intensive care patients was explored. METHOD: A systematic literature research without time constraints in the databases PubMed and CINAHL was performed. Included were quantitative and qualitative studies written in German or English that investigated tolerance of the ETT in adult intensive care patients. Excluded were anesthetic studies including in- and extubation immediately before and after operations. RESULTS: Of the 2348 hits, 14 studies were included, including 4 qualitative studies about the experience of intensive care, 8 quantitative studies including 2 randomized controlled studies, and 2 studies with a mixed approach. Within the studies different aspects could be identified, which may in- or decrease the tolerance of an ETT. Aspects like breathlessness, pain during endotracheal suctioning and inability to speak decrease the tolerance. Information, the presence of relatives and early mobilization appear to increase the tolerance. CONCLUSION: Tolerance of the ETT is a complex phenomenon. A reflected and critical evaluation of the behavior of the patient with an ETT is recommended. Interventions that increase the tolerance of the ETT should be adapted to the situation of the patient and should be evaluated daily.
BACKGROUND: Modern concepts for sedation and analgesia and guidelines recommend light analgesia and sedation, so that patients on mechanically ventilation are more awake, compared to previous concepts. Hence, these patients are more alert and able to experience their situation on the ventilator and their endotracheal tube (ETT). PROBLEM: There is currently no convincing evidence of how patients tolerate the tube under present conditions, which interventions could help them, or whether they want to be sedated deeper because of the tube. Based upon our own observations, a broad range of reactions are possible. PURPOSE: The tolerance of the ETT in intensive care patients was explored. METHOD: A systematic literature research without time constraints in the databases PubMed and CINAHL was performed. Included were quantitative and qualitative studies written in German or English that investigated tolerance of the ETT in adult intensive care patients. Excluded were anesthetic studies including in- and extubation immediately before and after operations. RESULTS: Of the 2348 hits, 14 studies were included, including 4 qualitative studies about the experience of intensive care, 8 quantitative studies including 2 randomized controlled studies, and 2 studies with a mixed approach. Within the studies different aspects could be identified, which may in- or decrease the tolerance of an ETT. Aspects like breathlessness, pain during endotracheal suctioning and inability to speak decrease the tolerance. Information, the presence of relatives and early mobilization appear to increase the tolerance. CONCLUSION: Tolerance of the ETT is a complex phenomenon. A reflected and critical evaluation of the behavior of the patient with an ETT is recommended. Interventions that increase the tolerance of the ETT should be adapted to the situation of the patient and should be evaluated daily.
Authors: Eduard E Vasilevskis; E Wesley Ely; Theodore Speroff; Brenda T Pun; Leanne Boehm; Robert S Dittus Journal: Chest Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: William D Schweickert; Mark C Pohlman; Anne S Pohlman; Celerina Nigos; Amy J Pawlik; Cheryl L Esbrook; Linda Spears; Megan Miller; Mietka Franczyk; Deanna Deprizio; Gregory A Schmidt; Amy Bowman; Rhonda Barr; Kathryn E McCallister; Jesse B Hall; John P Kress Journal: Lancet Date: 2009-05-14 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Johannes P van de Leur; Cees P van der Schans; Bert G Loef; Betto G Deelman; Jan H B Geertzen; Jan H Zwaveling Journal: Crit Care Date: 2004-10-28 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Jörn Grensemann; Lars Eichler; Sophie Kähler; Dominik Jarczak; Marcel Simon; Hans O Pinnschmidt; Stefan Kluge Journal: Crit Care Date: 2017-12-29 Impact factor: 9.097