Current practices and barriers impairing physicians' and nurses' adherence to analgo-sedation recommendations in the intensive care unit--a national survey

Crit Care. 2014 Dec 5;18(6):655. doi: 10.1186/s13054-014-0655-1.

Abstract

Introduction: Appropriate management of analgo-sedation in the intensive care unit (ICU) is associated with improved patient outcomes. Our objectives were: a) to describe utilization of analgo-sedation regimens and strategies (assessment using scales, protocolized analgo-sedation and daily sedation interruption (DSI)) and b) to describe and compare perceptions challenging utilization of these strategies, amongst physicians and nurses.

Methods: In the 101 adult ICUs in Belgium, we surveyed all physicians and a sample of seven nurses per ICU. A multidisciplinary team designed a survey tool based on a previous qualitative study and a literature review. The latter was available in paper (for nurses essentially) and web based (for physicians). Topics addressed included: practices, perceptions regarding recommended strategies and demographics. Pre-testing involved respondents' debriefings and test re-test reliability. Four reminders were sent.

Results: Response rate was 60% (898/1,491 participants) representing 94% (95/101) of all hospitals. Protocols were available to 31% of respondents. Validated scales to monitor pain in patients unable to self-report and to monitor sedation were available to 11% and 75% of respondents, respectively. Frequency of use of sedation scales varied (never to hourly). More physicians than nurses agreed with statements reporting benefits of sedation scales, including: increased autonomy for nurses (82% versus 68%, P < 0.001), enhancement of their role (84% versus 66%, P < 0.001), aid in monitoring administration of sedatives (83% versus 68%, P < 0.001), and cost control (54% versus 29%, P < 0.001). DSI was used in less than 25% of patients for 75% of respondents. More nurses than physicians indicated DSI is contra-indicated in hemodynamic instability (66% versus 53%, P < 0.001) and complicated weaning from mechanical ventilation (47% versus 29%, P < 0.001). Conversely, more physicians than nurses indicated contra-indications including: seizures (56% versus 40%, P < 0.001) and refractory intracranial hypertension (90% versus 83%, P < 0.001). More nurses than physicians agreed with statements reporting DSI impairs patient comfort (60% versus 37%, P < 0.001) and increases complications such as self-extubation (82% versus 69%, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Current analgo-sedation practices leave room for improvement. Physicians and nurses meet different challenges in using appropriate analgo-sedation strategies. Implementational interventions must be tailored according to profession.

MeSH terms

  • Analgesia / standards
  • Anesthesia / standards
  • Attitude of Health Personnel*
  • Belgium / epidemiology
  • Data Collection* / methods
  • Female
  • Guideline Adherence / standards*
  • Humans
  • Hypnotics and Sedatives / administration & dosage
  • Intensive Care Units / standards*
  • Male
  • Nurses / standards*
  • Pain / drug therapy
  • Pain / epidemiology
  • Physicians / standards*
  • Practice Guidelines as Topic / standards
  • Respiration, Artificial / standards

Substances

  • Hypnotics and Sedatives