Effects of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation on ventilator-free days in intensive care unit subjects with sputum retention; a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E) facilitates extubation. However, its potential to reduce the duration of ventilator use remains unclear. Therefore, the present study investigated whether the use of MI-E shortened the duration of mechanical ventilation in patients with high sputum retention. METHODS: A randomized open-label trial was conducted at a single intensive care unit (ICU) in Japan between November 2017 and June 2019. Ventilated subjects requiring suctioning at least once every hour due to sputum retention were randomly assigned to the MI-E group or conventional care group. The primary endpoint was the number of ventilator-free days on day 28. Secondary endpoints were ventilator days in surviving subjects, the length of ICU stay, and mortality and tracheostomy rates among survivors. RESULTS: Forty-eight subjects (81% males) with a median age of 72 years (interquartile range [IQR], 65-85 years) were enrolled. There were 27 subjects in the MI-E group and 21 in the control group. The median number of ventilator-free days was 21 (IQR, 13-24) and 18, respectively (IQR, 0-23) (P = .38). No significant differences were observed in the ICU length of stay (median, 10 days (IQR, 7-12) vs 12 days (IQR, 6-15); P = .31), mortality rate (19% vs 15%; odds ratio [OR], 1.36 [0.28-6.50]; P = .69), or tracheostomy rate among survivors (14% vs 28%; OR, 0.40 [0.08-1.91]; P = .25). CONCLUSION: In ventilated subjects in the ICU with high sputum retention, the use of MI-E did not significantly increase the number of ventilator-free days over that with conventional care.

The efficacy and safety of nurse-initiated sedation management in an intensive care unit: A two-phase prospective study in Japan.

AIM: This study aimed to evaluate whether nurse-initiated sedation management could provide more appropriate sedation compared to usual care in a Japanese intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: We conducted a single-center, prospective observational study before and after implementing nurse-initiated sedation using instruction sheets. Patients who had been admitted to a general adult ICU were enrolled. Before our ICU started nurse-initiated sedation (pre-implementation care), adjustment of sedatives and analgesics was performed only by a physician's written or verbal order; however, after implementing nurse-initiated sedation, nurses titrated drugs using instruction sheets. The primary outcome was the efficacy of nurse-initiated sedation, evaluated by the proportion achieving the target Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score. The analgesic status evaluated by Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT), days of delirium, ventilator days, ICU mortality and hospital mortality were also evaluated. RESULTS: The study examined 30 patients in the pre-implementation care phase and 30 patients in the nurse-initiated sedation phase. The proportions achieving the target RASS were 68% in the nurse-initiated sedation group and 42% in the pre-implementation care group (mean difference, 25%; 95% confidence interval, 13.4%-37.5%; P <.001). Almost all measured CPOT were within the range of 0-3 during both phases. Days of delirium, ventilator days, ICU survival, and hospital survival did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse-initiated sedation management achieved a significantly higher degree of target sedation status and was incorporated as part of the care in our ICU. It is a safe approach in countries, such as Japan, where sedation protocols are not widely used.