Trial reportIntensive care medicine2016
A randomized controlled trial of daily sedation interruption in critically ill children.
Trial report in Intensive care medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Daily sedation interruption versus no daily sedation interruption for critically ill adults and children requiring invasive mechanical ventilation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Daily Sedation Interruption vs Continuous Sedation in Pediatric Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Guideline
- Successful Use of [Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2017Trial
- Review
- Comparative Effectiveness of Dual- Versus Mono-Sedative Therapy on Opioid Administration, Sedative Administration, and Sedation Level in Mechanically Ventilated, Critically Ill Children.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2023Article
- Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia Prevention in Pediatric Patients: Narrative Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021.Journal of intensive care · 2022Article
- Pain and sedation management and monitoring in pediatric intensive care units across Europe: an ESPNIC survey.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Article
- Recommendations for analgesia and sedation in critically ill children admitted to intensive care unit.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2022Review
- Modified ABCDEF-Bundles for Critically Ill Pediatric Patients - What Could They Look Like?Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Review
- Article
- Sedation protocols in the pediatric intensive care unit: fact or fiction?Translational pediatrics · 2021Review
- Current State of Analgesia and Sedation in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Clinical and Economic Evaluation of the Impact of Midazolam on Morphine Therapy for Pain Relief in Critically Ill Ventilated Infants with Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Paediatric drugs · 2021Article
- Sedation, Analgesia, and Neuromuscular Blockade: An Assessment of Practices From 2009 to 2016 in a National Sample of 66,443 Pediatric Patients Cared for in the ICU.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2020Article
- Strategies to Optimize ICU Liberation (A to F) Bundle Performance in Critically Ill Adults With Coronavirus Disease 2019.Critical care explorations · 2020Review
- Practices related to assessment of sedation, analgesia and delirium among critical care pediatricians in Brazil.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2020Article
- Sedation strategies in children with pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome (PARDS).Annals of translational medicine · 2019Review
- Focus on paediatrics: 2017.Intensive care medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare daily sedation interruption plus protocolized sedation (DSI + PS) to protocolized sedation only (PS) in critically ill children.
methodsIn this multicenter randomized controlled trial in three pediatric intensive care units in the Netherlands, mechanically ventilated critically ill children with need for sedative drugs were included. They were randomly assigned to either DSI + PS or PS only. Children in both study arms received sedation adjusted on the basis of validated sedation scores. Provided a safety screen was passed, children in the DSI + PS group received daily blinded infusions of saline; children in the PS group received blinded infusions of the previous sedatives/analgesics. If a patient's sedation score indicated distress, the blinded infusions were discontinued, a bolus dose of midazolam was given and the 'open' infusions were resumed: DSI + PS at half of infusion rate, PS at previous infusion rate. The primary endpoint was the number of ventilator-free days at day 28. Data were analyzed by intention to treat.
resultsFrom October 2009 to August 2014, 129 children were randomly assigned to DSI + PS (n = 66) or PS (n = 63). The study was terminated prematurely due to slow recruitment rates. Median number of ventilator-free days did not differ: DSI + PS 24.0 days (IQR 21.6-25.8) versus PS 24.0 days (IQR 20.6-26.0); median difference 0.02 days (95 % CI -0.91 to 1.09), p = 0.90. Median ICU and hospital length of stay were similar in both groups: DSI + PS 6.9 days (IQR 5.2-11.0) versus PS 7.4 days (IQR 5.3-12.8), p = 0.47, and DSI + PS 13.3 days (IQR 8.6-26.7) versus PS 15.7 days (IQR 9.3-33.2), p = 0.19, respectively. Mortality at 30 days was higher in the DSI + PS group than in the PS group (6/66 versus 0/63, p = 0.03), though no causal relationship to the intervention could be established. Median cumulative midazolam dose did not differ: DSI + PS 14.1 mg/kg (IQR 7.6-22.6) versus PS 17.0 mg/kg (IQR 8.2-39.8), p = 0.11.
conclusionIn critically ill children, daily sedation interruption in addition to protocolized sedation did not improve clinical outcome and was associated with increased mortality compared with protocolized sedation only.
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.