ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Postextubation dysphagia (PED) is reported mainly in adults and is associated with poor outcomes. However, data on pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) patients are scarce. We aimed to assess the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes associated with PED in a PICU population. METHODS: Between 2019 and 2021, we conducted a prospective, observational cohort study of patients aged 1 month to 15 years. Within 24 h after extubation, a speech-language pathologist routinely screened all consecutive patients receiving mechanical ventilation (>24 h) for dysphagia. A Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) score of less than 6 indicated dysphagia. RESULTS: A total of 161 patients were included, with a PED incidence of 69%. After adjusting for confounding variables, five variables were significantly associated with PED (odds ratio; 95% confidence interval): age <24 months (4.84; 1.5-15.60), neurological comorbidities (7.47; 1.36-40.96), iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome (5.52; 1.31-23.14), use of neuromuscular blocking agents (4.19; 1.18-14.82), and duration of intubation >72 h (3.22; 1.08-9.64). Dysphagia was significantly associated with longer PICU and hospital stays and a longer delay to oral feeding than patients without PED, 14 versus 7.5 days, 21 versus 15 days, and 6 versus 1 day, respectively. Ten participants (9%) failed to resume total oral intake at hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that PED is highly prevalent in children and associated with adverse patient outcomes. Identifying a core of risk factors might improve prompt recognition of patients at risk for PED and implement preventive approaches and early interventions.
Subject(s)
Deglutition Disorders , Adult , Humans , Child , Deglutition Disorders/epidemiology , Deglutition Disorders/etiology , Critical Illness , Prospective Studies , Airway Extubation/adverse effects , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effectsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Compare outcomes of adult patients admitted to ICU- length of ICU stay, length of mechanical ventilation (MV), and time until extubation- according to the use of propofol versus midazolam. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and Cochrane databases to retrieve RCTs that compared propofol and midazolam used as sedatives in adult ICU patients. We applied a random-effects, meta-analytic model in all calculations. We applied the Cochrane collaboration tool and GRADE. We separated patients into two groups: acute surgical patients (hospitalization up to 24 h) and critically-ill patients (hospitalization over 24 h and whose articles mostly mix surgical, medical and trauma patients). RESULTS: Globally, propofol was associated with a reduced MV time of 4.46 h (MD: -4.46 [95% CI -7.51 to -1.42] p = 0.004, I2 = 63%, 6 studies) and extubation time of 7.95 h (MD: -7.95 [95% CI -9.86 to -6.03] p < 0.00001, I2 = 98%, 16 studies). Acute surgical patients sedation with propofol compared to midazolam was associated with a reduced ICU stay of 5.07 h (MD: -5.07 [95% CI -8.68 to -1.45] p = 0.006, I2 = 41%, 5 studies), MV time of 4.28 h (MD: -4.28; [95% CI -4.62 to -3.94] p < 0.0001, I2 = 0%, 3 studies), extubation time of 1.92 h (MD: -1.92; [95% CI -2.71 to -1.13] p = 0.00001, I2 = 89%, 9 studies). In critically-ill patients sedation with propofol compared to midazolam was associated with a reduced extubation time of 32.68 h (MD: -32.68 [95% CI -48.37 to -16.98] p = 0.0001, I2 = 97%, 9 studies). GRADE was very low for all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Sedation with propofol compared to midazolam is associated with improved clinical outcomes in ICU, with reduced ICU stay MV time and extubation time in acute surgical patients and reduced extubation time in critically-ill patients.
Subject(s)
Midazolam , Propofol , Adult , Critical Care , Humans , Hypnotics and Sedatives , Intensive Care Units , Respiration, ArtificialSubject(s)
Adrenergic alpha-Agonists/therapeutic use , Chloral Hydrate/adverse effects , Clonidine/therapeutic use , Hypnotics and Sedatives/adverse effects , Substance Withdrawal Syndrome/drug therapy , Analgesics, Opioid/adverse effects , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Fentanyl/adverse effects , Fentanyl/therapeutic use , Humans , Hypnotics and Sedatives/therapeutic use , Infant , Intensive Care, Neonatal , Lorazepam/therapeutic use , Male , Methadone/therapeutic use , Midazolam/adverse effects , Midazolam/therapeutic use , Pneumonia/complications , Pneumonia/drug therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/complications , Respiratory Insufficiency/drug therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) are commonly administered to critically ill children in pediatric intensive care units (PICU) in the USA and Europe. Although NMBA are frequently used in PICU patients, their role in the PICU setting has not yet been clearly defined. The aim of this study was to describe the sustained administration of NMBA and its impact on outcome of PICU patients. METHODS: A 3-year retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare mechanically-ventilated patients who received NMBA for at least 12 h with patients who did not (control group). RESULTS: A total of 317 consecutive patients were ventilated over 3473 days. Patients were similar in age, weight and severity scores. Thirty-four children (10.7%) received NMBA. Compared with controls, the neuromuscular blockade (NMB) group had a longer duration of mechanical ventilation (13.7 vs 5.5 days, P= 0.000), longer PICU stay (20 vs 11 days, P= 0.000) and increased occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (6.6 vs 4.1/1000 ventilator days, P= 0.010). The NMB use was not associated with higher mortality (8.8% vs 17.6%, P= 0.287) or longer hospital stay (30.5 vs 23 days, P= 0.117). CONCLUSION: Although the use of NMBA was not associated with greater mortality, we found that sustained use of NMBA is associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation, longer PICU stay and higher incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia when compared with controls. Larger studies are necessary to confirm these findings.
