ArticleJournal of the Intensive Care Society2026
The experiences of bedside nurses delivering an intensive care sedation study: A process evaluation within the A2B trial.
Article in Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03653832 (Alpha 2 Agonists for Sedation to Produce Better Outcomes From Critical Illness), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Alpha 2 Agonists for Sedation to Produce Better Outcomes From Critical Illness (A2B Trial): A Randomised, Parallel-group, Allocation Concealed, Controlled, Open, Phase 3 Pragmatic Clinical and Cost- Effectiveness Trial With Internal Pilot
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This process evaluation explored delivery of a complex sedation intervention within the Alpha-2 Agonists for Sedation to Produce Better Outcomes from Critical Illness (A2B) trial, which compared dexmedetomidine- and clonidine-based sedation with propofol (usual care). All groups targeted lighter sedation levels. The objective was to understand bedside nurses' experiences delivering the interventions and identify factors influencing protocol adherence and implementation. Methods: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews was conducted with intensive care unit (ICU) staff (consultants, bedside and research nurses) from A2B trial sites. Thematic analysis explored how participants experienced and delivered trial interventions, with particular focus on bedside nurses' abilities to manage sedation in line with the protocol. Results: Nurses with greater ICU experience described more confidence and adaptability in using alpha-2 agonists, while less experienced staff required support due to limited familiarity with lighter sedation. Hesitancy to up-titrate alpha-2 agonists was common, driven by concerns about bradycardia and hypotension. Reluctance to down-titrate propofol was shaped by fears of agitation and self-extubation. Deep sedation norms, especially amongst nurses trained during the COVID-19 pandemic, further hindered protocol adherence. Research nurses were instrumental in supporting implementation and bridging knowledge gaps. Conclusion: Despite all three trial groups targeting lighter sedation, nurse confidence, safety concerns, and ingrained cultural practices limited adherence to alpha-2 agonist-based protocols. Addressing these barriers through training, support, and cultural change will be essential for future trials and practice shifts involving lighter sedation strategies in ICU. Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03653832 https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03653832.
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.