• Canan Yiliaz, Nermin Kelebek Girgin, Nurdan Ozdemir, and Oya Kutlay.
• Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Uludağ University, Faculty of Medicine, Bursa, Turkey.
• Ulus Travma Acil Cer. 2010 Nov 1;16(6):521-6.

BackgroundWe aimed to compare the effects of nursing-implemented sedation protocol and daily interruption of sedative infusion on the duration of mechanical ventilation.MethodsFifty patients receiving mechanical ventilation and requiring sedation in the intensive care unit (ICU) were randomly selected to receive either daily interruption of sedative infusion (Group P, n=25) or nursing-implemented sedation protocol (Group N, n=25). In Group P, daily interruption of sedative infusions without any sedation protocol was performed by physicians. In Group N, nursing-implemented sedation protocol prepared by physicians was applied. In this group, if the ideal level of sedation was not achieved, information was given by nurses to physicians. Patients in each group were compared according to demographic variables, duration of mechanical ventilation and sedation, length of stay in the ICU, and mortality.ResultsDemographic variables, length of stay in the ICU and mortality were similar between the two groups. In Group P, duration of sedation and mechanical ventilation were significantly shorter than in Group N. Light sedation was seen more frequently in Group P and deep sedation in Group N.ConclusionDaily interruption of sedative infusions provided shorter duration of sedation and mechanical ventilation than nursing-implemented sedation with protocol. Although nurse-implemented sedation protocol has been found acceptable, if the number of nurses is lacking, we believe the nurse-implemented sedation protocol should not be applied.

25 keywords...

hide…