ArticleCritical care (London, England)2016
National survey and point prevalence study of sedation practice in UK critical care.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Protocol-directed sedation versus non-protocol-directed sedation in mechanically ventilated intensive care adults and children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Alpha2 agonists for sedation to produce better outcomes for adults with critical illness: a synopsis of the A2B RCT with cost-effectiveness and process evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Trial
- Characteristics and Reported Practices of ICUs Participating in the Sedation, Analgesia and Delirium Management International Study: Variability in Site-Level Management of Mechanically Ventilated Patients.Critical care explorations · 2026Article
- Choice of initial opioid for continuous infusions in patients receiving mechanical ventilation: a retrospective cohort study.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2026Article
- Development and Psychometric Testing of the Optimizing Context in Assessing Sedation in ICU (OCEAN-ICU) Instrument to Optimize Sedation Use in Intensive Care.Critical care explorations · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators to the delivery of delirium care in intensive care units: an analysis informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework.Anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Diagnostic value of digital continuous bowel sounds in critically ill patients with acute gastrointestinal injury: A prospective observational study.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Factors Associated With New Analgesic Requirements Following Critical Illness.Journal of intensive care medicine · 2024Observational
- Enhancing European Management of Analgesia, Sedation, and Delirium: A Multinational, Prospective, Interventional Before-After Trial.Neurocritical care · 2024Article
- Article
- Continuous infusion ketamine for sedation of mechanically ventilated adults in the intensive care unit: A scoping review.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2024Article
- A point prevalence survey and monitoring indicator research on the second batch of national key monitoring and rational use drugs.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Opioid, sedative, preadmission medication and iatrogenic withdrawal risk in UK adult critically ill patients: a point prevalence study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Article
- Observational
- Exploration of teaching practice of analgesia and sedation in mainland China: CASER experience.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- 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
- Practices in sedation, analgesia, mobilization, delirium, and sleep deprivation in adult intensive care units (SAMDS-ICU): an international survey before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.Annals of intensive care · 2022Article
- Machine learning for infection risk prediction in postoperative patients with non-mechanical ventilation and intravenous neurotargeted drugs.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- The effect of opioids on gastrointestinal function in the ICU.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe present study was designed to (1) establish current sedation practice in UK critical care to inform evidence synthesis and potential future primary research and (2) to compare practice reported via a survey with actual practice assessed in a point prevalence study (PPS).
methodsUK adult general critical care units were invited to participate in a survey of current sedation practice, and a representative sample of units was invited to participate in a PPS of sedation practice at the patient level. Survey responses were compared with PPS data where both were available.
resultsSurvey responses were received from 214 (91 %) of 235 eligible critical care units. Of these respondents, 57 % reported having a written sedation protocol, 94 % having a policy of daily sedation holds and 94 % using a sedation scale to assess depth of sedation. In the PPS, across units reporting a policy of daily sedation holds, a median of 50 % (IQR 33-75 %) of sedated patients were considered for a sedation hold. A median of 88 % (IQR 63-100 %) of patients were assessed using the same sedation scale as reported in the survey. Both the survey and the PPS indicated propofol as the preferred sedative and alfentanil, fentanyl and morphine as the preferred analgesics. In most of the PPS units, all patients had received the unit's reported first-choice sedative (median across units 100 %, IQR 64-100 %), and a median of 80 % (IQR 67-100 %) of patients had received the unit's reported first-choice analgesic. Most units (83 %) reported in the survey that sedatives are usually administered in combination with analgesics. Across units that participated in the PPS, 69 % of patients had received a combination of agents - most frequently propofol combined with either alfentanil or fentanyl.
conclusionsClinical practice reported in the national survey did not accurately reflect actual clinical practice at the patient level observed in the PPS. Employing a mixed methods approach provided a more complete picture of sedation practice in terms of breadth and depth of information.
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.