Teresa L May1,2, Richard R Riker1, Gilles L Fraser1, Karen G Hirsch3, Sachin Agarwal4, Christine Duarte5, Hans Friberg6, Eldar Søreide7, John McPherson8, Robert Hand9, David Kent2, Niklas Nielsen10, David B Seder1. 1. Department of Critical Care, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME. 2. Division of Clinical Decision Making, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA. 3. Department of Neurology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. 4. Department of Neurology, Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY. 5. Center for Outcomes Research, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME. 6. Department of Anesthesia and Intensive care, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 7. Critical Care and Anesthesiology Research Group, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway. 8. Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN. 9. Department of Critical Care, Eastern Maine Medical Center, Bangor, ME. 10. Department of Clinical Sciences, Anesthesia and Intensive care, Lund University, Helsingborg Hospital, Helsingborg, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Sedation and neuromuscular blockade protocols in patients undergoing targeted temperature management after cardiac arrest address patient discomfort and manage shivering. These protocols vary widely between centers and may affect outcomes. DESIGN: Consecutive patients admitted to 20 centers after resuscitation from cardiac arrest were prospectively entered into the International Cardiac Arrest Registry between 2006 and 2016. Additional data about each center's sedation and shivering management practice were obtained via survey. Sedation and shivering practices were categorized as escalating doses of sedation and minimal or no neuromuscular blockade (sedation and shivering practice 1), sedation with continuous or scheduled neuromuscular blockade (sedation and shivering practice 2), or sedation with as-needed neuromuscular blockade (sedation and shivering practice 3). Good outcome was defined as Cerebral Performance Category score of 1 or 2. A logistic regression hierarchical model was created with two levels (patient-level data with standard confounders at level 1 and hospitals at level 2) and sedation and shivering practices as a fixed effect at the hospital level. The primary outcome was dichotomized Cerebral Performance Category at 6 months. SETTING: Cardiac arrest receiving centers in Europe and the United states from 2006 to 2016 PATIENTS:: Four-thousand two-hundred sixty-seven cardiac arrest patients 18 years old or older enrolled in the International Cardiac Arrest Registry. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The mean age was 62 ± 15 years, 36% were female, 77% out-of-hospital arrests, and mean ischemic time was 24 (± 18) minutes. Adjusted odds ratio (for age, return of spontaneous circulation, location of arrest, witnessed, initial rhythm, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, defibrillation, medical history, country, and size of hospital) was 1.13 (0.74-1.73; p = 0.56) and 1.45 (1.00-2.13; p = 0.046) for sedation and shivering practice 2 and sedation and shivering practice 3, respectively, referenced to sedation and shivering practice 1. CONCLUSION: Cardiac arrest patients treated at centers using as-needed neuromuscular blockade had increased odds of good outcomes compared with centers using escalating sedation doses and avoidance of neuromuscular blockade, after adjusting for potential confounders. These findings should be further investigated in prospective studies.
OBJECTIVES: Sedation and neuromuscular blockade protocols in patients undergoing targeted temperature management after cardiac arrest addresspatient discomfort and manage shivering. These protocols vary widely between centers and may affect outcomes. DESIGN: Consecutive patients admitted to 20 centers after resuscitation from cardiac arrest were prospectively entered into the International Cardiac Arrest Registry between 2006 and 2016. Additional data about each center's sedation and shivering management practice were obtained via survey. Sedation and shivering practices were categorized as escalating doses of sedation and minimal or no neuromuscular blockade (sedation and shivering practice 1), sedation with continuous or scheduled neuromuscular blockade (sedation and shivering practice 2), or sedation with as-needed neuromuscular blockade (sedation and shivering practice 3). Good outcome was defined as Cerebral Performance Category score of 1 or 2. A logistic regression hierarchical model was created with two levels (patient-level data with standard confounders at level 1 and hospitals at level 2) and sedation and shivering practices as a fixed effect at the hospital level. The primary outcome was dichotomized Cerebral Performance Category at 6 months. SETTING:Cardiac arrest receiving centers in Europe and the United states from 2006 to 2016 PATIENTS:: Four-thousand two-hundred sixty-seven cardiac arrestpatients 18 years old or older enrolled in the International Cardiac Arrest Registry. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The mean age was 62 ± 15 years, 36% were female, 77% out-of-hospital arrests, and mean ischemic time was 24 (± 18) minutes. Adjusted odds ratio (for age, return of spontaneous circulation, location of arrest, witnessed, initial rhythm, bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, defibrillation, medical history, country, and size of hospital) was 1.13 (0.74-1.73; p = 0.56) and 1.45 (1.00-2.13; p = 0.046) for sedation and shivering practice 2 and sedation and shivering practice 3, respectively, referenced to sedation and shivering practice 1. CONCLUSION:Cardiac arrestpatients treated at centers using as-needed neuromuscular blockade had increased odds of good outcomes compared with centers using escalating sedation doses and avoidance of neuromuscular blockade, after adjusting for potential confounders. These findings should be further investigated in prospective studies.
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Clifton W Callaway; Michael W Donnino; Ericka L Fink; Romergryko G Geocadin; Eyal Golan; Karl B Kern; Marion Leary; William J Meurer; Mary Ann Peberdy; Trevonne M Thompson; Janice L Zimmerman Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-11-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Edgar A Samaniego; Michael Mlynash; Anna Finley Caulfield; Irina Eyngorn; Christine A C Wijman Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: J Hope Kilgannon; Brian W Roberts; Alan E Jones; Neil Mittal; Evan Cohen; Jessica Mitchell; Michael E Chansky; Stephen Trzeciak Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Mathias Stöckl; Christoph Testori; Fritz Sterz; Michael Holzer; Christoph Weiser; Andreas Schober; Graham Nichol; Martin Frossard; Harald Herkner; Jasmin Kechvar; Heidrun Losert Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2017-08-30 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Michael J Murray; Heidi DeBlock; Brian Erstad; Anthony Gray; Judi Jacobi; Che Jordan; William McGee; Claire McManus; Maureen Meade; Sean Nix; Andrew Patterson; M Karen Sands; Richard Pino; Ann Tescher; Richard Arbour; Bram Rochwerg; Catherine Friederich Murray; Sangeeta Mehta Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Juliana Barr; Gilles L Fraser; Kathleen Puntillo; E Wesley Ely; Céline Gélinas; Joseph F Dasta; Judy E Davidson; John W Devlin; John P Kress; Aaron M Joffe; Douglas B Coursin; Daniel L Herr; Avery Tung; Bryce R H Robinson; Dorrie K Fontaine; Michael A Ramsay; Richard R Riker; Curtis N Sessler; Brenda Pun; Yoanna Skrobik; Roman Jaeschke Journal: Am J Health Syst Pharm Date: 2013-01-01 Impact factor: 2.637
Authors: Ameldina Ceric; Teresa L May; Anna Lybeck; Tobias Cronberg; David B Seder; Richard R Riker; Christian Hassager; Jesper Kjaergaard; Zana Haxhija; Hans Friberg; Josef Dankiewicz; Niklas Nielsen Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2022-07-28 Impact factor: 3.532
Authors: Jerry P Nolan; Claudio Sandroni; Bernd W Böttiger; Alain Cariou; Tobias Cronberg; Hans Friberg; Cornelia Genbrugge; Kirstie Haywood; Gisela Lilja; Véronique R M Moulaert; Nikolaos Nikolaou; Theresa Mariero Olasveengen; Markus B Skrifvars; Fabio Taccone; Jasmeet Soar Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2021-03-25 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Byung Kook Lee; In Soo Cho; Joo Suk Oh; Wook Jin Choi; Jung Hee Wee; Chang Sun Kim; Won Young Kim; Chun Song Youn Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-12-17 Impact factor: 3.240