Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
https://bjan-sba.org/article/doi/10.1016/j.bjane.2016.07.002
Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology
Scientific Article

The correlation among the Ramsay sedation scale, Richmond agitation sedation scale and Riker sedation agitation scale during midazolam-remifentanil sedation

Correlação entre a escala de sedação de Ramsay, escala de sedação-agitação de Richmond e escala de sedação-agitação de Riker durante sedação com midazolam-remifentanil

Turgut Namigar; Karacalar Serap; Akdaş; Tekin Esra; Odacı; lar Özgül; Öztürk Ali Can; Ak Aysel; Ali Achmet

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjane.2016.07.002 Braz J Anesthesiol, vol.67, n4, p.347-354, 2017
PDF English
PDF Português
Downloads: 0
Views: 848

Abstract

Abstract Background and objectives: Sedative and analgesic treatment administered to critically ill patients need to be regularly assessed to ensure that previously stated goals are well achieved as the risk of complications of oversedation is minimized. We revised and prospectively tested the Ramsay Sedation scale (RSS) for interrater reliability and compared it with the Sedation-Agitation Scale (SAS) and the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) to test construct validity during midazolam-remifentanil sedation. Methods: A convenience sample of ICU patients was simultaneously and independently examined by pairs of trained evaluators by using the revised SAS, RSS, and RASS. Ninety-two ICU patients were examined a total of 276 times by evaluator pairs. Results: The mean patient age was 61.32 ± 18.68 years, 45,7% were female (n = 42), 54.3% male (n = 50). Their APACHE values varied between 3 and 39 with an average of 13.27 ± 7.86 and 75% of the cases were under mechanical ventilation. When classified by using RSS (2.70 ± 1.28), 10.9% were anxious or agitated (RSS1), 68.5% were calm (RSS 2-3), and 20.6% were sedated (RSS 4-6). When classified by using RASS (-0.64 ± 1.58), 20.7% were anxious or agitated (RASS+1 to +4), 63.0% were calm (RASS 0 to -2), and 16.3% were sedated (RASS -3 to -5). When classified by using SAS (2.63 ± 1.00), 12% were anxious or agitated (SAS 5-7), 57.6% were calm (SAS 4), and 30.4% were sedated (SAS 1-3). RSS was correlated with the SAS (r = -0.656, p < 0.001) and RASS was correlated with the SAS (r = 0.565, p < 0.001). RSS was highly correlated with the RASS (r = -0.664, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Ramsay is both reliable and valid (high correlation with the RASS and SAS scales) in assessing agitation and sedation in adult ICU patients.

Keywords

Critically ill, Sedation scale, Validity, Reliability

Resumo

Resumo Justificativa e objetivos: O tratamento de pacientes em estado crítico com sedativos e analgésicos deve ser regularmente avaliado para garantir que as metas pré-definidas sejam atingidas, bem como minimizar o risco de complicações resultantes de sedação em excesso. Conduzimos uma revisão e testamos prospectivamente a Escala de Sedação de Ramsay (Ramsay Sedation Scale [RSS]) para a confiabilidade interavaliador e a comparamos com a Escala de Sedação e Agitação de Riker (Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale [RRSAS]) e a Escala de Sedação e Agitação de Richmond (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale [RASS]) para testar a validade de construto durante a sedação com midazolam-remifentanil. Métodos: Uma amostra de conveniência de pacientes de UTI foi simultânea e independentemente examinada por pares de avaliadores treinados com o uso das escalas revisadas RRSAS, RSS e RASS. Foram examinados 92 pacientes de UTI por pares de avaliadores em 276 momentos. Resultados: A média dos pacientes foi de 61,32 ± 18,68 anos; 45,7% eram do sexo feminino (n = 42) e 54,3% do masculino (n = 50). Seus escores APACHE variaram entre 3-39, com média de 13,27 ± 7,86, e 75% dos casos receberam ventilação mecânica. Quando RSS foi usada para a classificação (2,70 ± 1,28), 10,9% dos pacientes estavam ansiosos ou agitados (RSS1), 68,5% estavam calmos (RSS 2 a 3) e 20,6% estavam sedados (RSS 4 a 6). Quando RASS foi usada para a classificação (-0,64 ± 1,58), 20,7% dos pacientes estavam ansiosos ou agitados (RASS +1 a +4), 63,0% estavam calmos (RASS 0 a -2) e 16,3% estavam sedados (RASS -3 a -5). Quando RSAS foi usada para a classificação (2,63 ± 1,00), 12% dos pacientes estavam ansiosos ou agitados (RSAS 5 a 7), 57,6% estavam calmos (RSAS 4) e 30,4% estavam sedados (RSAS 1 a 3). Houve correlação de RSS com RSAS (r = -0,656, p < 0,001) e de RASS com RSAS (r = 0,565, p < 0,001). Houve forte correlação de RSS com RASS (r = -0,664, p < 0,001). Conclusões: A RSS é confiável e válida (forte correlação com RASS e RSAS) para avaliar a sedação e agitação em pacientes adultos internados em UTI.

Palavras-chave

Estado crítico, Escala de sedação, Validade, Confiabilidade

References

Tallgren M, Pettilä V, Hynninen M. Quality assessment of sedation in intensive care. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2006;50:942-6.

Costa MG, Chiarandini P, Rocca GD. Sedation in the critically Ill patient. Transpl Proc. 2006;38:803-4.

Cevik F, Celik M, Clark PM, Macit C. Sedation and analgesia in intensive care: a comparison of fentanyl and remifentanil. Pain Res Treat. 2011:650320.

Thuong M. Sedation and analgesia assessment tools in ICU patients. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2008;27:581-95.

McGrane S, Pandharipande PP. Sedation in the intensive care unit. Minerva Anestesiol. 2012;78:369-80.

Kollef MH, Levy NT, Ahrens TS, Schaiff R, Prentice D, Sherman G. The use of continuous i.v. sedation is associated with prolongation of mechanical ventilation. Chest. 1998;114:541-8.

Brook AD, Ahrens TS, Schaiff R. Effect of a nursing-implemented sedation protocol on the duration of mechanical ventilation. Crit Care Med. 1999;27:2609-15.

Sessler CN, Riker RR, Ramsay MA. Evaluating and monitoring sedation, arousal, and agitation in the ICU. Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;34:169-78.

Devabhakthuni S, Armahizer MJ, Dasta JF, Kane-Gill SL. Analgosedation: a paradigm shift in intensive care unit sedation practice. Ann Pharmacother. 2012;46:530-40.

Botha JA, Mudholkar P. The effect of a sedation scale on ventilation hours, sedative, analgesic and inotropic use in an intensive care unit. Crit Care Resus. 2004;6:253-7.

Breen D, Karabinis A, Malnrain M. Decreased duration of mechanical ventilation when comparing analgesia-based sedation using remifentanil with standart hypnotic-based sedation for up to 10 days in intensive care unit patients: a randomised, controlled trial. Crit Care. 2005;9:200-10.

Abdar ME, Rafiei H, Abbaszade A. Effects of nurses’ practice of a sedation protocol on sedation and consciousness levels of patients on mechanical ventilation. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2013;18:391-5.

Varndell W, Elliott D, Fry M. The validity, reliability, responsiveness and applicability of observation sedation-scoring instruments for use with adult patients in the emergency department: a systematic literature review. Aust Emerg Nurs J. 2015;18:1-23.

Riker RR, Picard JT, Fraser GL. Prospective evaluation of the Sedation-Agitation Scale for adult critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 1999;27:1325-9.

Khan BA, Guzman O, Campbell NL. Comparison and agreement between the Richmond agitation-sedation scale and the Riker sedation-agitation scale in evaluating patients’ eligibility for delirium assessment in the ICU. Chest. 2012;142:48-54.

Mirski MA, LeDroux SN, Lewin 3rd JJ, Thompson CB, Mirski KT, Griswold M. Validity and reliability of an intuitive onscious sedation scoring tool: the nursing instrument for the communication of sedation. Crit Care Med. 2010;38:1674-84.

Nassar Junior AP, Pires Neto RC, de Figueiredo WB, Park M. Validity, reliability and applicability of Portuguese versions of sedation-agitation scales among critically ill patients. Sao Paulo Med J. 2008;126:215-9.

Constantin JM, Chanques G, De Jonghe B. Current use of sedation and analgesia: 218 resuscitations in France services practices survey. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2010;29:339-46.

van Dishoeck AM, van der Hooft T, Simoons ML, van der Ent M, Scholte op Reimer WJ. Reliable assessment of sedation level in routine clinical practice by adding an instruction to the Ramsay Scale. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2009;8:125-8.

Robinson BR, Berube M, Barr J, Riker R, Gélinas C. Psychometric analysis of subjective sedation scales in critically ill adults. Crit Care Med. 2013;41:S16-29.

Haddad S, Arabi Y, Al-Dawood A. Sedation in ICU: are we achieving goals?. Middle East J Anaesthesiol. 2009;20:389-96.

5dcd40a10e8825b521bf58f1 rba Articles
Links & Downloads
2352-2291 (Electronic) 0104-0014 (Printed)
Braz J Anesthesiol ©2024 All rights reserved.

Braz J Anesthesiol

Share this page
Page Sections