4.5 Article

Current practices and safety of medication use during rapid sequence intubation

Journal

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
Volume 45, Issue -, Pages 65-70

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.01.017

Keywords

Intensive Care Unit (KU); Emergency department; Rapid sequence incubation (RSI); Medications; Adverse effects

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Characterize medication practices during and immediately after rapid sequence intubation (RSI) by provider/location and evaluate adverse drug events. Materials and methods: This was a multicenter, observational, cross-sectional study of adult and pediatric intensive care unit and emergency department patients over a 24-h period surrounding first intubation. Results: A total of 404 patients from 34 geographically diverse institutions were included (mean age 58 +/- 22 years, males 59%, pediatric 8%). During RSI, 21%, 87%, and 77% received pre-induction, induction, and paralysis, respectively. Significant differences in medication use by provider type were seen. Etomidate was administered to 58% with sepsis, but was not associated with adrenal insufficiency. Ketamine was associated with hypotension post-RSI [RR = 1.78 (1.36-2.35)] and use was low with traumatic brain injury/stroke (1.5%). Succinylcholine was given to 67% of patients with baseline bradycardia and was significantly associated with bradycardia post-RSI [RR = 1.81 (1.11-2.94)]. An additional 13% given succinylcholine had contraindications. Sedation practices post-RSI were not consistent with current practice guidelines and most receiving a non-depolarizing paralytic did not receive adequate sedation post-RSI. Conclusions: Medication practices during RSI vary amongst provider and medications are often used inappropriately. There is opportunity for optimization of medication use during RSI. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available