Sedation Assessment in Critically Ill Adults: 2001-2004 Update

OBJECTIVE To review recently published literature on the validity and reliability of sedation assessment tools in critically ill adults and evaluate the potential advantages and disadvantages of each. DATA SOURCES A computerized search of MEDLINE and PubMed (2001–May 2004) was conducted. STUDY SELEC...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Annals of pharmacotherapy 2004-11, Vol.38 (11), p.1898-1906
Hauptverfasser: Watson, Brian D, Kane-Gill, Sandra L
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1906
container_issue 11
container_start_page 1898
container_title The Annals of pharmacotherapy
container_volume 38
creator Watson, Brian D
Kane-Gill, Sandra L
description OBJECTIVE To review recently published literature on the validity and reliability of sedation assessment tools in critically ill adults and evaluate the potential advantages and disadvantages of each. DATA SOURCES A computerized search of MEDLINE and PubMed (2001–May 2004) was conducted. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION Sedation assessment tools used in adult intensive care units (ICUs) were identified. DATA SYNTHESIS Six subjective and 3 objective assessment tools were identified. Four subjective assessment tools have reliability and 4 have validity data published that were not previously available. There are reliability data to further support the use of the previously published Motor Activity Assessment Scale. Additional reliability data exist for the Ramsay Scale and Glasgow Coma Scale. Conflicting evidence is available with the use of the Bispectral Index monitor in the ICU. Recently, the Patient State Index and Auditory Evoked Potentials were introduced for objective monitoring in critically ill patients. CONCLUSIONS Increasing data on sedation assessment were published over the last few years, probably in response to supporting evidence that goal-driven sedation therapy improves patient outcomes. Reliability and/or validity testing exists for many of these scales. Several useful tools are available to guide sedation therapy in critically ill patients.
doi_str_mv 10.1345/aph.1E167
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66985961</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1345_aph.1E167</sage_id><sourcerecordid>66985961</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-f6a297c646e17d34df8d251c93748492b893feed95b45c21bf0c44213f3f5dc43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkD1PwzAQhi0EoqUw8AdQJhBDis92nJgBqaoKVKrEAJ2txLHbVM4HcaKo_x5DK3Vhubvhufd0D0K3gKdAWfSUNtspLIDHZ2gMESMhJzE-9zPmOMQkwSN05dwOYyyAiEs0gojyOCbxGL186jztiroKZs5p50pddUFRBfO26AqVWrsPltYGs7y3nXsOCMYQ-sKCdeP39DW6MKl1-ubYJ2j9uviav4erj7flfLYKFWWsCw1PiYgVZ1xDnFOWmyQnEShBY5YwQbJEUKN1LqKMRYpAZrBijAA11ES5YnSC7g-5TVt_99p1siyc0tamla57JzkXSSQ4ePDxAKq2dq7VRjZtUabtXgKWv7KklyX_ZHn27hjaZ6XOT-TRzumqSzda7uq-rfyT_yY9HMBtsdkORaulK707nwtyGAaaSAAJiUjoD4loe9Y</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>66985961</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Sedation Assessment in Critically Ill Adults: 2001-2004 Update</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Watson, Brian D ; Kane-Gill, Sandra L</creator><creatorcontrib>Watson, Brian D ; Kane-Gill, Sandra L</creatorcontrib><description>OBJECTIVE To review recently published literature on the validity and reliability of sedation assessment tools in critically ill adults and evaluate the potential advantages and disadvantages of each. DATA SOURCES A computerized search of MEDLINE and PubMed (2001–May 2004) was conducted. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION Sedation assessment tools used in adult intensive care units (ICUs) were identified. DATA SYNTHESIS Six subjective and 3 objective assessment tools were identified. Four subjective assessment tools have reliability and 4 have validity data published that were not previously available. There are reliability data to further support the use of the previously published Motor Activity Assessment Scale. Additional reliability data exist for the Ramsay Scale and Glasgow Coma Scale. Conflicting evidence is available with the use of the Bispectral Index monitor in the ICU. Recently, the Patient State Index and Auditory Evoked Potentials were introduced for objective monitoring in critically ill patients. CONCLUSIONS Increasing data on sedation assessment were published over the last few years, probably in response to supporting evidence that goal-driven sedation therapy improves patient outcomes. Reliability and/or validity testing exists for many of these scales. Several useful tools are available to guide sedation therapy in critically ill patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1060-0280</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1542-6270</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1345/aph.1E167</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15367727</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: Harvey Whitney Books</publisher><subject>Adult ; Conscious Sedation ; Critical Care - classification ; Critical Illness ; Humans ; Intensive Care Units ; Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods ; Reproducibility of Results</subject><ispartof>The Annals of pharmacotherapy, 2004-11, Vol.38 (11), p.1898-1906</ispartof><rights>2004 SAGE Publications</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-f6a297c646e17d34df8d251c93748492b893feed95b45c21bf0c44213f3f5dc43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-f6a297c646e17d34df8d251c93748492b893feed95b45c21bf0c44213f3f5dc43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1345/aph.1E167$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1345/aph.1E167$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15367727$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Watson, Brian D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kane-Gill, Sandra L</creatorcontrib><title>Sedation Assessment in Critically Ill Adults: 2001-2004 Update</title><title>The Annals of pharmacotherapy</title><addtitle>Ann Pharmacother</addtitle><description>OBJECTIVE To review recently published literature on the validity and reliability of sedation assessment tools in critically ill adults and evaluate the potential advantages and disadvantages of each. DATA SOURCES A computerized search of MEDLINE and PubMed (2001–May 2004) was conducted. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION Sedation assessment tools used in adult intensive care units (ICUs) were identified. DATA SYNTHESIS Six subjective and 3 objective assessment tools were identified. Four subjective assessment tools have reliability and 4 have validity data published that were not previously available. There are reliability data to further support the use of the previously published Motor Activity Assessment Scale. Additional reliability data exist for the Ramsay Scale and Glasgow Coma Scale. Conflicting evidence is available with the use of the Bispectral Index monitor in the ICU. Recently, the Patient State Index and Auditory Evoked Potentials were introduced for objective monitoring in critically ill patients. CONCLUSIONS Increasing data on sedation assessment were published over the last few years, probably in response to supporting evidence that goal-driven sedation therapy improves patient outcomes. Reliability and/or validity testing exists for many of these scales. Several useful tools are available to guide sedation therapy in critically ill patients.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Conscious Sedation</subject><subject>Critical Care - classification</subject><subject>Critical Illness</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intensive Care Units</subject><subject>Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><issn>1060-0280</issn><issn>1542-6270</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNptkD1PwzAQhi0EoqUw8AdQJhBDis92nJgBqaoKVKrEAJ2txLHbVM4HcaKo_x5DK3Vhubvhufd0D0K3gKdAWfSUNtspLIDHZ2gMESMhJzE-9zPmOMQkwSN05dwOYyyAiEs0gojyOCbxGL186jztiroKZs5p50pddUFRBfO26AqVWrsPltYGs7y3nXsOCMYQ-sKCdeP39DW6MKl1-ubYJ2j9uviav4erj7flfLYKFWWsCw1PiYgVZ1xDnFOWmyQnEShBY5YwQbJEUKN1LqKMRYpAZrBijAA11ES5YnSC7g-5TVt_99p1siyc0tamla57JzkXSSQ4ePDxAKq2dq7VRjZtUabtXgKWv7KklyX_ZHn27hjaZ6XOT-TRzumqSzda7uq-rfyT_yY9HMBtsdkORaulK707nwtyGAaaSAAJiUjoD4loe9Y</recordid><startdate>20041101</startdate><enddate>20041101</enddate><creator>Watson, Brian D</creator><creator>Kane-Gill, Sandra L</creator><general>Harvey Whitney Books</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20041101</creationdate><title>Sedation Assessment in Critically Ill Adults: 2001-2004 Update</title><author>Watson, Brian D ; Kane-Gill, Sandra L</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c344t-f6a297c646e17d34df8d251c93748492b893feed95b45c21bf0c44213f3f5dc43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Conscious Sedation</topic><topic>Critical Care - classification</topic><topic>Critical Illness</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intensive Care Units</topic><topic>Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Watson, Brian D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kane-Gill, Sandra L</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Annals of pharmacotherapy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Watson, Brian D</au><au>Kane-Gill, Sandra L</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Sedation Assessment in Critically Ill Adults: 2001-2004 Update</atitle><jtitle>The Annals of pharmacotherapy</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Pharmacother</addtitle><date>2004-11-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>1898</spage><epage>1906</epage><pages>1898-1906</pages><issn>1060-0280</issn><eissn>1542-6270</eissn><abstract>OBJECTIVE To review recently published literature on the validity and reliability of sedation assessment tools in critically ill adults and evaluate the potential advantages and disadvantages of each. DATA SOURCES A computerized search of MEDLINE and PubMed (2001–May 2004) was conducted. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION Sedation assessment tools used in adult intensive care units (ICUs) were identified. DATA SYNTHESIS Six subjective and 3 objective assessment tools were identified. Four subjective assessment tools have reliability and 4 have validity data published that were not previously available. There are reliability data to further support the use of the previously published Motor Activity Assessment Scale. Additional reliability data exist for the Ramsay Scale and Glasgow Coma Scale. Conflicting evidence is available with the use of the Bispectral Index monitor in the ICU. Recently, the Patient State Index and Auditory Evoked Potentials were introduced for objective monitoring in critically ill patients. CONCLUSIONS Increasing data on sedation assessment were published over the last few years, probably in response to supporting evidence that goal-driven sedation therapy improves patient outcomes. Reliability and/or validity testing exists for many of these scales. Several useful tools are available to guide sedation therapy in critically ill patients.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>Harvey Whitney Books</pub><pmid>15367727</pmid><doi>10.1345/aph.1E167</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1060-0280
ispartof The Annals of pharmacotherapy, 2004-11, Vol.38 (11), p.1898-1906
issn 1060-0280
1542-6270
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66985961
source Access via SAGE; MEDLINE
subjects Adult
Conscious Sedation
Critical Care - classification
Critical Illness
Humans
Intensive Care Units
Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods
Reproducibility of Results
title Sedation Assessment in Critically Ill Adults: 2001-2004 Update
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T01%3A57%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Sedation%20Assessment%20in%20Critically%20Ill%20Adults:%202001-2004%20Update&rft.jtitle=The%20Annals%20of%20pharmacotherapy&rft.au=Watson,%20Brian%20D&rft.date=2004-11-01&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1898&rft.epage=1906&rft.pages=1898-1906&rft.issn=1060-0280&rft.eissn=1542-6270&rft_id=info:doi/10.1345/aph.1E167&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E66985961%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=66985961&rft_id=info:pmid/15367727&rft_sage_id=10.1345_aph.1E167&rfr_iscdi=true