Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30242747›Full record

ArticleAnnals of intensive care2018

Impact of oversedation prevention in ventilated critically ill patients: a randomized trial-the AWARE study.

SRLF Trial Group

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of intensive care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01617265 (Prevention of Oversedation in Intensive Care Patients Under Mechanical Ventilation), which is not on this map. Cited by 18 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT01617265 nacompletednot on this map

Prevention of Oversedation in Intensive Care Patients Under Mechanical Ventilation : the AWARE Multicentric Randomized Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorFrench Society for Intensive CareRan2012 to 2015Enrolled1,180ConditionsICU Patients Requiring Invasive Mechanical VentilationArmsClinical Procedure to Prevent Oversedation, Usual sedation practice
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. ARDS Clinical Practice Guideline 2021.Journal of intensive care · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

SRLF Trial Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough oversedation has been associated with increased morbidity in ventilated critically ill patients, it is unclear whether prevention of oversedation improves mortality. We aimed to assess 90-day mortality in patients receiving a bundle of interventions to prevent oversedation as compared to usual care.

methodsIn this randomized multicentre trial, all adult patients requiring mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h were included. Two groups were compared: patients managed according to usual sedation practices (control), and patients receiving sedation according to an algorithm which provided a gradual multilevel response to pain, agitation, and ventilator dyssynchrony with no specific target to alter consciousness and no use of sedation scale and promoted the use of alternatives to continuous infusion of midazolam or propofol (intervention).

resultsInclusions were stopped before reaching the planned enrolment. Between 2012 and 2014, 584 patients were included in the intervention group and 590 in the control group. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups. Although the use of midazolam and propofol was significantly lower in the intervention group, 90-day mortality was not significantly lower (39.4 vs. 44.2% in the control group, p = 0.09). There were no significant differences in 1-year mortality between the two groups. The time to first spontaneous breathing trial and time to successful extubation were significantly shorter in the intervention group than in the control group. These last results should be interpreted with precaution regarding the several limitations of the trial including the early termination.

conclusionsThis underpowered study of severely ill patients was unable to show that a strategy to prevent oversedation could significantly reduce mortality. Trial registration NCT01617265.

Indexed as

Intensive care unitsMechanical ventilationMortalitySedationWeaning

Identifiers

PMID30242747
PMCPMC6150862
OpenAlexW3127271112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.