Search

Sleep is an important physiologic process, and lack of sleep is associated with a host of adverse outcomes. Basic and clinical research has documented the important role circadian rhythm plays in biologic function. Critical illness is a time of extreme vulnerability for patients, and the important role sleep may play in recovery for intensive care unit (ICU) patients is just beginning to be explored. This concise clinical review focuses on the current state of research examining sleep in critical illness. We discuss sleep and circadian rhythm abnormalities that occur in ICU patients and the challenges to measuring alterations in circadian rhythm in critical illness and review methods to measure sleep in the ICU, including polysomnography, actigraphy, and questionnaires. We discuss data on the impact of potentially modifiable disruptors to patient sleep, such as noise, light, and patient care activities, and report on potential methods to improve sleep in the setting of critical illness. Finally, we review the latest literature on sleep disturbances that persist or develop after critical illness.

Background: Many critically ill patients are transferred to other care facilities instead of to home at hospital discharge., Objective: To identify patient-related factors associated with hospital discharge to a care facility after critical illness and to estimate the magnitude of risk associated with each factor., Methods: Retrospective cohort study of 548 survivors of critical illness in a medical intensive care unit. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent risk factors for discharge to a care facility. Only the first 72 hours of intensive care were analyzed., Results: Approximately one-quarter of the survivors of critical illness were discharged to a care facility instead of to home. This event occurred more commonly in older patients, even after adjustment for severity of illness and comorbid conditions (odds ratio [OR] 1.8 for patients ≥ 65 years of age vs patients < 65 years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.1; P = .02). The risk was greatest for patients who received mechanical ventilation (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.0-5.8; P < .001) or had hospitalizations characterized by severe cognitive dysfunction (OR, 8.1; 95% CI, 1.3-50.6; P = .02) or poor strength and/or mobility (OR, 31.7; 95% CI, 6.4-157.3; P < .001). The model showed good discrimination (area under the curve, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.77-0.86)., Conclusion: The model, which did not include baseline function or social variables, provided good discrimination between patients discharged to a care facility after critical illness and patients discharged to home. These results suggest that future research should focus on the debilitating effects of respiratory failure and on conditions with cognitive and neuromuscular sequelae.

Objective: In critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation, daily interruption of sedative infusions decreases duration of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit length of stay. Whether this sedation strategy reduces the incidence of complications commonly associated with critical illness is not known., Design: Blinded, retrospective chart review., Setting: University-based hospital in Chicago, IL., Patients: One hundred twenty-eight patients receiving mechanical ventilation and continuous infusions of sedative drugs in a medical intensive care unit., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: We performed a blinded, retrospective evaluation of the database from our previous trial of 128 patients randomized to daily interruption of sedative infusions vs. sedation as directed by the medical intensive care unit team without this strategy. Seven distinct complications associated with mechanical ventilation and critical illness were identified: a) ventilator-associated pneumonia; b) upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage; c) bacteremia; d) barotrauma; e) venous thromboembolic disease; and f) cholestasis or g) sinusitis requiring surgical intervention. The incidence of complications was evaluated for each patient's hospital course. One hundred twenty-six of 128 charts were available for review. Patients undergoing daily interruption of sedative infusions experienced 13 complications (2.8%) vs. 26 (6.2%) in those subjected to conventional sedation techniques (p =.04)., Conclusions: Daily interruption of sedative infusions in critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation reduces intensive care unit length of stay and, in turn, decreases the incidence of complications of critical illness associated with prolonged intubation and mechanical ventilation.

Although the administration of sedatives is a commonplace activity in the ICU, few guidelines are available to aid the clinician in this practice. The first principle of sedative administration is to define the specific problem requiring sedation and to rationally choose the drug and depth of sedation appropriate for the indication. Next, the clinician must recognize the diverse and often unpredictable effects of critical illness on drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Failure to recognize these effects may lead initially to inadequate sedation and subsequently to drug accumulation. Drug accumulation may result in prolonged encephalopathy and mechanical ventilation and may mask the development of neurologic or intra-abdominal complications. Daily interruption of continuous sedative infusions is a simple and effective way of addressing this problem. A glossary of sedative drugs commonly used in the ICU is included in this review.