BACKGROUND: Pain assessment is a challenge in critically ill patients, in particular those who are unable to express movements in reaction to noxious stimuli. The purpose of the study was to compare the pupillary response and skin conductance to pain stimulation in critically ill unconscious patients. METHODS: This observational study included adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with acute brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale < 9 with a motor response < 5) and/or requirements for deep level of sedation. Automated pupillometry (Algiscan, ID-MED, Marseille, France) was used to determine pupillary reflex dilation during tetanic stimulation. The maximum intensity of the stimulation value allowed the determination of a pupillary pain index score ranging from 1 (no nociception) to 9 (high nociception): a pupillary pain index (PPI) score of ≤4 was used to reflect adequate pain control. For skin conductance (SC), the number of SC peaks per second (NSCF) was collected concomitantly to tetanic stimulation. An NSCF of ≤0.07 peak/second was used to reflect adequate pain control. RESULTS: Of the 51 included patients, there were 32 with brain injury and 19 receiving deep sedation. Mean PPI score was 5 (Interquartile Range= 2-7); a total of 28 (55%) patients showed inadequate control of the nociceptive stimulation according to the PPI assessment. Only 15 (29%) patients showed a detectable skin conductance, with NSCF values from 0.07 to 0.47/s. No correlation was found between skin conductance algesimeter (SCA)-derived variables and PPI score or pupillary dilation to pain. CONCLUSIONS: Detection of inadequate pain control might vary according to the method used to assess nociception in ICU patients. A poor agreement between quantitative pupillometry and skin conductance was observed.
BACKGROUND:Pain assessment is a challenge in critically illpatients, in particular those who are unable to express movements in reaction to noxious stimuli. The purpose of the study was to compare the pupillary response and skin conductance to pain stimulation in critically ill unconsciouspatients. METHODS: This observational study included adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with acute brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale < 9 with a motor response < 5) and/or requirements for deep level of sedation. Automated pupillometry (Algiscan, ID-MED, Marseille, France) was used to determine pupillary reflex dilation during tetanic stimulation. The maximum intensity of the stimulation value allowed the determination of a pupillary pain index score ranging from 1 (no nociception) to 9 (high nociception): a pupillary pain index (PPI) score of ≤4 was used to reflect adequate pain control. For skin conductance (SC), the number of SC peaks per second (NSCF) was collected concomitantly to tetanic stimulation. An NSCF of ≤0.07 peak/second was used to reflect adequate pain control. RESULTS: Of the 51 included patients, there were 32 with brain injury and 19 receiving deep sedation. Mean PPI score was 5 (Interquartile Range= 2-7); a total of 28 (55%) patients showed inadequate control of the nociceptive stimulation according to the PPI assessment. Only 15 (29%) patients showed a detectable skin conductance, with NSCF values from 0.07 to 0.47/s. No correlation was found between skin conductance algesimeter (SCA)-derived variables and PPI score or pupillary dilation to pain. CONCLUSIONS: Detection of inadequate pain control might vary according to the method used to assess nociception in ICU patients. A poor agreement between quantitative pupillometry and skin conductance was observed.
Authors: A Ploghaus; C Narain; C F Beckmann; S Clare; S Bantick; R Wise; P M Matthews; J N Rawlins; I Tracey Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2001-12-15 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Michał Jan Stasiowski; Małgorzata Starzewska; Ewa Niewiadomska; Seweryn Król; Kaja Marczak; Jakub Żak; Aleksandra Pluta; Jerzy Eszyk; Beniamin Oskar Grabarek; Izabela Szumera; Michał Nycz; Anna Missir; Lech Krawczyk; Przemysław Jałowiecki Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) Date: 2021-05-14