Patient comfort in the intensive care unit : a multicentre, binational point prevalence study of analgesia, sedation and delirium management

Objective: To measure the prevalence of assessment and management practices for analgesia, sedation and delirium in patients in Australian and New Zealand intensive care units.
Materials and Methods: We developed survey items from a modified Delphi panel and included them in a binational, point prevalence study. We used a standard case report form to capture retrospective patient data on management of analgesia, sedation and delirium at the end of a 4-hour period on the study day. Other data were collected during independent assessment of patient status and medication requirements.
Results: Data were collected on 569 patients in 41 ICUs. Pain assessment was documented in the 4 hours before study observation in 46% of patients. Of 319 assessable patients, 16% had moderate pain and 6% had severe pain. Routine sedation assessment using a scale was recorded in 63% of intubated and ventilated patients. When assessed, 38% were alert and calm, or drowsy and rousable, 22% were lightly to moderately sedated, 31% were deeply sedated (66% of these had a documented indication), and 9% were agitated or restless. Sedatives were titrated to a target level in 42% of patients. Routine assessment of delirium occurred in 3%, and at study assessment 9% had delirium. Wrist or arm restraints were used for 7% of patients.
Conclusions: Only two-thirds of sedated patients had their sedation levels formally assessed, half had pain assessed and very few had formal assessment of delirium. Our description of current practices, and other observational data, may help in planning further research in this area.

Determining criteria to assess patient readiness for discharge from postanaesthetic care: an international Delphi study

Aims and objectives
To obtain expert consensus on essential criteria required to assess patient readiness for discharge from the postanaesthetic care unit.

Background
A patient's condition can deteriorate after surgery, and the immediate postoperative period is recognised internationally as a time of increased risk to patient safety. A recent systematic review identified evidence-based assessment criteria for the safe discharge of patients from the postanaesthetic care unit and identified gaps in the evidence.

Design
Descriptive consensus study using the Delphi method.

Methods
Members of international clinical specialist groups with expertise in anaesthesia or postanaesthetic care participated in three consultation rounds. Online surveys were used to determine expert consensus with regard to aspects of postanaesthetic care and specific criteria for assessing patient readiness for discharge. Three rounds of surveys were conducted from May 2011–September 2012.

Results
Twenty-three experts contributed to the panel. Consensus, that is, at least 75% agreement, was reached in regard to 24 criteria considered essential (e.g. respiratory rate 100%; pain 100%; heart rate 95%; temperature 91%). Consensus was also reached for 15 criteria not considered essential (e.g. appetite 96%; headache 76%). Consensus was not obtained for a further 10 criteria. Participants (95%) agreed that a discharge tool was important to ensure safe patient discharge.

Conclusion
Consensus was achieved by a panel of international experts on the use of a tool to assess patient readiness for discharge from postanaesthesia care unit and specific variables to be included or excluded from the tool. Further work is required to develop a tool and test its reliability and validity.

Relevance to clinical practice
The findings of this study have informed the development of an evidence-based tool to be piloted in a subsequent funded study of nursing assessment of patient readiness for discharge from the postanaesthetic care unit.

Patient participation in treatment in the context of acute care

This mixed methods, case study identified key patient, clinician and environmental factors associated with hospitalised patients’ ability and willingness to participate in their recovery after cardiac surgery. Patient participation is a significant component of the processes for achieving quality and safety outcomes. The findings inform redesign of the care delivery system to facilitate participation within acute care environments.