ArticleWorld journal of emergency medicine2015
Effect of sedation on short-term and long-term outcomes of critically ill patients with acute respiratory insufficiency.
Article in World journal of emergency medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimal bispectral index exists in healthy patients undergoing general anesthesia: A validation study.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2024Article
- What are the perceptions of intensive care staff about their sedation practices when caring for a mechanically ventilated patient?: A systematic mixed-methods review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2022Review
- Comparative Safety Profiles of Sedatives Commonly Used in Clinical Practice: A 10-Year Nationwide Pharmacovigilance Study in Korea.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- The Prognostic Value of Brain Dysfunction in Critically Ill Patients with and without Sepsis: ABrain sciences · 2021Article
- Opioids in COVID-19: Two Sides of a Coin.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- [Extreme obesity-particular aspect of invasive and noninvasive ventilation].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2019Review
- Moral Distress and Austerity: An Avoidable Ethical Challenge in Healthcare.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe present study aimed to determine the short-term and long-term outcomes of critically ill patients with acute respiratory insufficiency who had received sedation or no sedation.
methodsThe data of 91 patients who had received mechanical ventilation in the first 24 hours between November 2008 and October 2009 were retrospectively analyzed. These patients were divided into two groups: a sedation group (n=28) and a non-sedation group (n=63). The patients were also grouped in two groups: deep sedation group and daily interruption and /or light sedation group.
resultsOverall, the 91 patients who had received ventilation ≥48 hours were analyzed. Multivariate analysis demonstrated two independent risk factors for in-hospital death: sequential organ failure assessment score (P=0.019, RR 1.355, 95%CI 1.051-1.747, B=0.304, SE=0.130, Wald=50483) and sedation (P=0.041, RR 5.015, 95%CI 1.072-23.459, B=1.612, SE=0.787, Wald=4.195). Compared with the patients who had received no sedation, those who had received sedation had a longer duration of ventilation, a longer stay in intensive care unit and hospital, and an increased in-hospital mortality rate. The Kaplan-Meier method showed that patients who had received sedation had a lower 60-month survival rate than those who had received no sedation (76.7% vs. 88.9%, Log-rank test=3.630, P=0.057). Compared with the patients who had received deep sedation, those who had received daily interruption or light sedation showed a decreased in-hospital mortality rate (57.1% vs. 9.5%, P=0.008). The 60-month survival of the patients who had received deep sedation was significantly lower than that of those who had daily interruption or light sedation (38.1% vs. 90.5%, Log-rank test=6.783, P=0.009).
conclusionsSedation was associated with in-hospital death. The patients who had received sedation had a longer duration of ventilation, a longer stay in intensive care unit and in hospital, and an increased in-hospital mortality rate compared with the patients who did not receive sedation. Compared with daily interruption or light sedation, deep sedation increased the in-hospital mortality and decreased the 60-month survival for patients who had received sedation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.