Practice parameters for intravenous analgesia and sedation for adult patients in the intensive care unit: an executive summary. Society of Critical Care Medicine

The development of practice parameters for intravenous analgesia and sedation for adult patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting for the purpose of guiding clinical practice. A task force of more than 40 experts in disciplines related to the use of analgesic and sedative agents in the ICU was convened from the membership of the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM). The task force members provided the personal experience and determined the published literature (MEDLINE articles, textbooks, pharmacopeias, etc.) from which consensus would be sought. Published literature was reviewed and classified into one of four predetermined categories, according to study design and scientific value. The task force met several times as a whole, and numerous times in smaller groups by teleconference, over a 1-yr period to identify the pertinent literature and arrive at consensus recommendations for the whole task force to discuss. Consideration was given to the relationship between the weight of scientific information and the experts' viewpoints. Over the next year, draft documents were composed by a task force steering committee and debated by the task force members until consensus was reached by nominal group process. The task force draft was then reviewed, assessed, and edited by the Board of Regents of the ACCM. After steering committee approval, the draft document was reviewed and approved by the SCCM Council. To facilitate rapid communication of the six recommendations contained within the complete and unabridged practice parameter document, an executive summary was prepared for publication by the ACCM Board of Regents, and this executive summary was approved by the task force steering committee and the SCCM Executive Council. A consensus of experts provided six recommendations with supporting data for intravenous analgesia and sedation in the ICU setting: a) morphine sulfate is the preferred analgesic agent for critically ill patients; b) fentanyl is the preferred analgesic agent for critically ill patients with hemodynamic instability, for patients manifesting symptoms of histamine release with morphine, or morphine allergy; c) hydromorphone can serve as an acceptable alternative to morphine; d) midazolam or propofol are the preferred agents only for the short-term (< 24 hrs) treatment of anxiety in the critically ill adult; e) lorazepam is the preferred agent for the prolonged treatment of anxiety in the critically ill adult; f) haloperidol is the preferred agent for the treatment of delirium in the critically ill adult. This executive summary selectively presents supporting information and is not intended as a substitute for the complete document

Practice parameters for sustained neuromuscular blockade in the adult critically ill patient: an executive summary. Society of Critical Care Medicine

The development of practice parameters for achieving sustained neuromuscular blockade in the adult critically ill patient for the purpose of guiding clinical practice. A task force of more than 40 experts in disciplines related to the use of neuromuscular blocking agents in the intensive care unit was convened from the membership of the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM). The task force members provided the personal experience and determined the published literature (MEDLINE articles, textbooks, pharmacopeias, etc.) from which consensus would be sought. Published literature was reviewed and classified into one of four predetermined categories, according to study design and scientific value. The task force met several times as a whole, and numerous times in smaller groups by teleconference, over a 1-yr period to identify the pertinent literature and arrive at consensus recommendations for the whole task force to discuss. Consideration was given to the relationship between the weight of scientific information and the experts' viewpoints. Over the next year, draft documents were composed by a task force steering committee and debated by the task force members until consensus was reached by nominal group process. The task force draft was then reviewed, assessed, and edited by the Board of Regents of the ACCM. After steering committee approval, the draft document was reviewed and approved by the SCCM Council. To facilitate rapid communication of the three recommendations contained within the complete and unabridged practice parameter document, an executive summary was prepared for publication by the ACCM Board of Regents, and this executive summary was approved by the task force steering committee and the SCCM Executive Council. A consensus of experts provided three recommendations with supporting data for achieving sustained neuromuscular blockade in critically ill patients: a) pancuronium is the preferred neuromuscular blocking agent for most critically ill patients; b) vecuronium is the preferred neuromuscular blocking agent for those patients with cardiac disease or hemodynamic instability in whom tachycardia may be deleterious; c) patients receiving neuromuscular blocking agents should be appropriately assessed for the degree of blockade that is being sustained. This executive summary selectively presents supporting information and is not intended as a substitute for the complete document

Fifteen-minute Frequency of Glucose Measurements and the Use of Threshold Alarms: Impact on Mitigating Dysglycemia in Critically Ill Patients.

BACKGROUND: The use of near-continuous blood glucose (BG) monitoring has the potential to improve glycemic control in critically ill patients. The MANAGE IDE trial evaluated the performance of the OptiScanner (OS) 5000 in a multicenter cohort of 200 critically ill patients. METHODS: An Independent Group reviewed the BG run charts of all 200 patients and voted whether unblinded use of the OS, with alarms set at 90 and 130 to 150 mg/dL to alert the clinical team to impending hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia, respectively, would have eliminated episodes of dysglycemia: hypoglycemia, defined as a single BG/dL; hyperglycemia, defined as \u3e4 hours of BG \u3e150 mg/dL; severe hyperglycemia, defined as \u3e4 hours of BG \u3e200 mg/dL and increased glucose variability (GV), defined as coefficient of variation (CV) \u3e20%. RESULTS: At least one episode of dysglycemia occurred in 103 (51.5%) of the patients, including 6 (3.0%) with hypoglycemia, 83 (41.5%) with hyperglycemia, 18 (9.0%) with severe hyperglycemia, and 40 (20.0%) with increased GV. Unblinded use of the OS with appropriate alarms would likely have averted 97.1% of the episodes of dysglycemia: hypoglycemia (100.0%), hyperglycemia (96.4%), severe hyperglycemia (100.0%), and increased GV (97.5%). Point accuracy of the OS was very similar to that of the point of care BG monitoring devices used in the trial. CONCLUSION: Unblinded use of the OS would have eliminated nearly every episode of dysglycemia in this cohort of critically ill patients, thereby markedly improving the quality and safety of glucose control

Fifteen-minute Frequency of Glucose Measurements and the Use of Threshold Alarms: Impact on Mitigating Dysglycemia in Critically Ill Patients.

BACKGROUND: The use of near-continuous blood glucose (BG) monitoring has the potential to improve glycemic control in critically ill patients. The MANAGE IDE trial evaluated the performance of the OptiScanner (OS) 5000 in a multicenter cohort of 200 critically ill patients. METHODS: An Independent Group reviewed the BG run charts of all 200 patients and voted whether unblinded use of the OS, with alarms set at 90 and 130 to 150 mg/dL to alert the clinical team to impending hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia, respectively, would have eliminated episodes of dysglycemia: hypoglycemia, defined as a single BG/dL; hyperglycemia, defined as \u3e4 hours of BG \u3e150 mg/dL; severe hyperglycemia, defined as \u3e4 hours of BG \u3e200 mg/dL and increased glucose variability (GV), defined as coefficient of variation (CV) \u3e20%. RESULTS: At least one episode of dysglycemia occurred in 103 (51.5%) of the patients, including 6 (3.0%) with hypoglycemia, 83 (41.5%) with hyperglycemia, 18 (9.0%) with severe hyperglycemia, and 40 (20.0%) with increased GV. Unblinded use of the OS with appropriate alarms would likely have averted 97.1% of the episodes of dysglycemia: hypoglycemia (100.0%), hyperglycemia (96.4%), severe hyperglycemia (100.0%), and increased GV (97.5%). Point accuracy of the OS was very similar to that of the point of care BG monitoring devices used in the trial. CONCLUSION: Unblinded use of the OS would have eliminated nearly every episode of dysglycemia in this cohort of critically ill patients, thereby markedly improving the quality and safety of glucose control

Continuous glucose control in the ICU : report of a 2013 round table meeting

Achieving adequate glucose control in critically ill patients is a complex but important part of optimal patient management. Until relatively recently, intermittent measurements of blood glucose have been the only means of monitoring blood glucose levels. With growing interest in the possible beneficial effects of continuous over intermittent monitoring and the development of several continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, a round table conference was convened to discuss and, where possible, reach consensus on the various aspects related to glucose monitoring and management using these systems. In this report, we discuss the advantages and limitations of the different types of devices available, the potential advantages of continuous over intermittent testing, the relative importance of trend and point accuracy, the standards necessary for reporting results in clinical trials and for recognition by official bodies, and the changes that may be needed in current glucose management protocols as a result of a move towards increased use of CGM. We close with a list of the research priorities in this field, which will be necessary if CGM is to become a routine part of daily practice in the management of critically ill patients.status: publishe