Sedation and Analgesia in the ICU: Optimizing Patient Care Through Evidence-Based Practice

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Appropriate sedation and analgesia management in the intensive care unit (ICU) remains a cornerstone of critical care medicine, directly impacting patient outcomes, length of stay, and long-term sequelae. This comprehensive review examines current evidence-based approaches to ICU sedation, focusing on commonly used agents, target-driven protocols, and strategies to minimize complications such as oversedation and delirium. We provide practical guidance for postgraduate trainees in critical care, highlighting key clinical pearls and evidence-based "hacks" to optimize patient care while avoiding common pitfalls.

Keywords: ICU sedation, analgesia, dexmedetomidine, midazolam, fentanyl, delirium, RASS, daily sedation breaks

Introduction

The landscape of ICU sedation has undergone a paradigm shift over the past two decades, evolving from deep sedation protocols to lighter, more targeted approaches that prioritize patient comfort while maintaining safety. The traditional "knock them out" mentality has been replaced by nuanced, individualized strategies that recognize sedation as both a therapeutic intervention and a potential source of iatrogenic harm.

Modern ICU sedation practice is guided by the principle of achieving the minimum effective level of sedation necessary for patient safety and comfort, while preserving neurological function and facilitating early mobilization. This approach has been shown to reduce mechanical ventilation duration, ICU length of stay, and the incidence of long-term cognitive impairment.¹²

The complexity of ICU sedation lies in balancing multiple competing priorities: patient comfort, ventilator synchrony, hemodynamic stability, and the prevention of complications such as delirium, withdrawal syndromes, and critical illness myopathy. Success requires not only pharmacological expertise but also a deep understanding of patient-specific factors, timing of interventions, and the art of clinical assessment.

Commonly Used Sedative and Analgesic Agents

Midazolam: The Double-Edged Sword

Midazolam remains one of the most frequently prescribed sedatives in ICUs worldwide, despite growing evidence supporting alternative agents. This short-acting benzodiazepine offers rapid onset, predictable pharmacokinetics in healthy individuals, and anxiolytic properties that many clinicians find appealing.³

Mechanism and Pharmacokinetics: Midazolam enhances GABA-mediated inhibition through allosteric modulation of GABA-A receptors. Its lipophilic properties ensure rapid CNS penetration, with onset within 2-5 minutes of IV administration. The drug undergoes hepatic metabolism via CYP3A4, producing an active metabolite (1-hydroxymidazolam) that can accumulate in renal dysfunction.⁴

Clinical Considerations: The primary advantage of midazolam lies in its predictable reversal with flumazenil and its anticonvulsant properties. However, prolonged use (>48-72 hours) frequently leads to accumulation, particularly in patients with hepatic dysfunction, obesity, or advanced age. The MENDS trial demonstrated significantly longer mechanical ventilation duration and higher delirium rates with midazolam compared to dexmedetomidine.⁵

Clinical Pearl: When using midazolam, implement strict daily assessment protocols. If a patient requires continuous infusion for >72 hours, strongly consider transitioning to alternative agents. The "midazolam trap" occurs when increasing doses are needed due to accumulation, creating a vicious cycle of oversedation.

Fentanyl: The Analgesic Cornerstone

Fentanyl represents the gold standard for ICU analgesia, offering potent opioid effects with minimal hemodynamic impact when used appropriately. Its rapid onset and offset make it ideal for titration in critically ill patients.⁶

Pharmacological Profile: This synthetic phenylpiperidine derivative is 80-100 times more potent than morphine, with high lipophilicity ensuring rapid CNS penetration. Peak effect occurs within 1-3 minutes, with duration of 30-60 minutes after single doses. However, with prolonged infusions, context-sensitive half-time increases dramatically due to tissue accumulation.⁷

Advantages and Limitations: Fentanyl's hemodynamic stability makes it particularly valuable in shock states and cardiovascular surgery patients. Unlike morphine, it lacks active metabolites and produces minimal histamine release. However, chest wall rigidity can occur with rapid, high-dose administration, and accumulation becomes problematic with prolonged use, especially in patients with hepatic dysfunction.⁸

Clinical Hack: Use the "fentanyl equivalency rule": 1 mcg/kg/hr of fentanyl ≈ 1 mg/kg/hr of morphine. When weaning prolonged fentanyl infusions, expect a prolonged offset - plan for gradual tapers over 24-72 hours rather than abrupt discontinuation.

Dexmedetomidine: The Game Changer

Dexmedetomidine has revolutionized ICU sedation practice, offering unique properties that align with modern lighter sedation goals. This highly selective α2-adrenoceptor agonist provides sedation without respiratory depression, making it invaluable for specific patient populations.⁹

Unique Mechanism: Unlike GABA-ergic sedatives, dexmedetomidine acts through α2-adrenoceptors in the locus coeruleus, producing a more "natural" sleep-like state. Patients remain easily arousable and can participate in care activities while maintaining comfort. The drug also provides inherent analgesic effects through spinal α2-receptor activation.¹⁰

Clinical Advantages: The SEDCOM trial demonstrated reduced delirium rates, shorter mechanical ventilation duration, and improved patient-ventilator synchrony with dexmedetomidine compared to conventional sedatives. The preservation of respiratory drive allows for successful use in non-intubated patients requiring procedural sedation or NIV tolerance.¹¹

Limitations and Considerations: Dexmedetomidine's primary limitations include bradycardia, hypotension (particularly with loading doses), and limited deep sedation capability. The drug is significantly more expensive than traditional agents, and withdrawal symptoms can occur after prolonged use.¹²

Oyster Alert: Dexmedetomidine loading doses (1 mcg/kg over 10 minutes) frequently cause hemodynamic instability in ICU patients. Start with maintenance infusions (0.2-0.7 mcg/kg/hr) and titrate upward rather than using loading doses in critically ill patients.

Expert Pearl: Dexmedetomidine is particularly valuable for "difficult to sedate" patients, including those with substance abuse disorders, delirium, or ventilator dysynchrony despite adequate conventional sedation. It's also excellent for facilitating neurological assessments due to its rapid reversibility.

Sedation Targets and Assessment Scales

The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS)

The RASS has emerged as the most validated and widely adopted sedation assessment tool in critical care. This 10-point scale ranges from -5 (unarousable) to +4 (combative), with 0 representing alert and calm state.¹³

Practical RASS Implementation: Proper RASS assessment requires standardized technique: verbal stimulation followed by physical stimulation if necessary. The key distinction lies between RASS -2 (light sedation, briefly awakens to verbal stimulation) and RASS -3 (moderate sedation, movement but no eye contact to verbal stimulation).

Target Setting Strategy: Modern practice favors light sedation targets (RASS -2 to 0) for most ICU patients, with specific exceptions for certain clinical scenarios. Deep sedation (RASS -4 to -5) should be reserved for specific indications such as severe ARDS requiring neuromuscular blockade, status epilepticus, or intracranial pressure management.¹⁴

Individualized Sedation Goals

Clinical Scenario-Based Targeting:

Mechanically Ventilated Medical/Surgical Patients: RASS -2 to 0
Post-operative Cardiovascular Surgery: RASS -1 to +1 (early extubation goals)
Traumatic Brain Injury: RASS -2 to -1 (facilitate neurological assessments)
ARDS with Neuromuscular Blockade: RASS -4 to -5 (deep sedation indicated)
Liberation from Mechanical Ventilation: RASS 0 to -1¹⁵

Advanced Pearl: Consider "sedation cycling" for complex patients - allowing periods of lighter sedation for assessment and family interaction, followed by deeper sedation for specific procedures or interventions. This approach optimizes both comfort and physiological stability.

Daily Sedation Interruption and the ABCDEF Bundle

Evidence Base for Sedation Interruption

The landmark study by Kress et al. demonstrated that daily sedation interruption (DSI) reduced mechanical ventilation duration by 2.4 days and ICU length of stay by 3.5 days. This practice became standard after the AWAKENING trial showed combined spontaneous awakening and breathing trials reduced mortality and improved neurological outcomes.¹⁶

Protocol Implementation: Effective DSI requires structured protocols with clear safety criteria. Interruption should be attempted daily unless contraindicated by specific clinical conditions such as active seizures, alcohol withdrawal, or neuromuscular blockade.

Safety Criteria for DSI:

Stable hemodynamics (no high-dose vasopressors)
Adequate oxygenation (FiO2 ≤0.6, PEEP ≤10 cmH2O)
No active seizures or withdrawal syndromes
No contraindication to awakening (ICP concerns, etc.)¹⁷

The ABCDEF Bundle: Integrated Care Approach

The Society of Critical Care Medicine's ICU Liberation Campaign promotes the ABCDEF bundle, representing a paradigm shift toward integrated, patient-centered care:

Assess, prevent, and manage pain
Both spontaneous awakening and breathing trials
Choice of analgesia and sedation
Delirium assessment, prevention, and management
Early mobility and exercise
Family engagement and empowerment¹⁸

Implementation Pearl: Bundle compliance requires multidisciplinary coordination. Establish clear communication pathways between nursing, respiratory therapy, physical therapy, and physician teams. Daily multidisciplinary rounds should include specific discussion of bundle elements.

Clinical Hack: Use the "sedation vacation" concept strategically. Rather than abrupt cessation, implement graduated awakening with rapid re-sedation capability if patients become distressed or hemodynamically unstable.

Avoiding Oversedation: Recognition and Prevention

The Hidden Costs of Oversedation

Oversedation represents one of the most common and preventable complications in ICU care, contributing to prolonged mechanical ventilation, increased healthcare costs, and long-term cognitive impairment. The economic impact alone exceeds $1.5 billion annually in the United States.¹⁹

Physiological Consequences: Deep sedation impairs normal sleep architecture, disrupts circadian rhythms, and contributes to ICU-acquired weakness through muscle disuse and metabolic dysfunction. Prolonged immobility increases thromboembolism risk and promotes pressure injury development.²⁰

Recognition Strategies

Early Warning Signs of Oversedation:

Inability to arouse patient for routine care
Persistent RASS ≤ -3 despite minimal sedation requirements
Delayed awakening during sedation interruption
Ventilator dysynchrony paradoxically worsening with sedation increases
Development of tolerance requiring escalating doses²¹

Advanced Assessment Techniques: Bispectral Index (BIS) monitoring, while not routinely recommended, can provide objective sedation depth assessment in complex cases where clinical assessment is challenging. BIS values of 40-60 correlate with appropriate ICU sedation levels.²²

Prevention Protocols

Structured Prevention Approach:

Start Low, Go Slow: Initiate sedation at lowest effective doses
Frequent Reassessment: Minimum every 4 hours, more frequently during titration
Analgesia-First Strategy: Address pain before adding sedation
Avoid PRN Stacking: Ensure previous doses have reached peak effect before additional dosing
Regular Drug Holidays: Implement scheduled sedation interruptions²³

Technology Integration: Consider closed-loop sedation systems in institutions with appropriate expertise. These systems can reduce sedation variability and improve target achievement, though they require careful validation and ongoing oversight.²⁴

Oyster Warning: The "sedation cascade" occurs when side effects of oversedation (agitation from discomfort, ventilator dysynchrony) are misinterpreted as need for more sedation, creating a dangerous cycle of escalating drug administration.

Delirium Prevention and Management

Understanding ICU Delirium

Delirium affects 60-80% of mechanically ventilated ICU patients and represents an acute brain dysfunction with profound short and long-term consequences. The condition is associated with increased mortality, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and persistent cognitive impairment lasting months to years after ICU discharge.²⁵

Pathophysiology and Risk Factors: ICU delirium results from complex interactions between patient vulnerability (age, dementia, depression), illness severity, and iatrogenic factors. Sedative medications, particularly benzodiazepines, represent the most modifiable risk factor for delirium development.²⁶

Assessment Tools

Confusion Assessment Method for ICU (CAM-ICU): The CAM-ICU remains the gold standard for delirium detection, with high sensitivity and specificity when performed correctly. The assessment requires four key features: acute onset/fluctuation, inattention, altered consciousness, and disorganized thinking.²⁷

Implementation Pearls:

Perform CAM-ICU assessment twice daily, ideally during nursing shift changes
Ensure adequate training for all staff members
Document both positive and negative assessments
Integrate results into daily multidisciplinary rounds

Prevention Strategies

Non-pharmacological Interventions: The most effective delirium prevention strategies focus on modifiable environmental and care factors:

Sleep Hygiene: Minimize nighttime interruptions, reduce noise and lighting
Early Mobilization: Progressive mobility protocols starting with passive range of motion
Cognitive Stimulation: Orientation aids, family involvement, music therapy
Vision and Hearing Optimization: Ensure glasses and hearing aids are available
Pain Management: Adequate analgesia without oversedation²⁸

Pharmacological Prevention: While no medications are FDA-approved for delirium prevention, certain agents show promise:

Dexmedetomidine: Consistently associated with reduced delirium incidence compared to other sedatives
Atypical Antipsychotics: Limited evidence for prevention, reserved for management
Melatonin: Emerging evidence for sleep cycle regulation and delirium prevention²⁹

Management of Established Delirium

First-Line Interventions:

Identify and treat precipitating factors (infection, metabolic derangements, drug toxicity)
Optimize environmental factors
Ensure adequate pain control
Minimize psychoactive medications
Promote normal sleep-wake cycles³⁰

Pharmacological Management: Antipsychotic medications may be considered for severe agitation that poses safety risks, but evidence for routine use is limited. Haloperidol (0.5-2 mg IV q6-8h) or quetiapine (25-50 mg PO BID) represent first-line options when medications are necessary.³¹

Critical Oyster: Avoid using sedatives to treat delirium-related agitation. This approach often worsens the underlying condition and perpetuates the cycle of brain dysfunction.

Special Considerations and Advanced Strategies

Difficult-to-Sedate Populations

Substance Use Disorders: Patients with chronic alcohol or benzodiazepine use may require significantly higher sedation doses due to cross-tolerance. Consider phenobarbital for severe withdrawal syndromes and dexmedetomidine for its unique mechanism of action.³²

Traumatic Brain Injury: Sedation goals must balance ICP control with neurological assessment requirements. Propofol offers rapid on/off characteristics but requires careful monitoring for propofol infusion syndrome. Consider burst suppression protocols for refractory intracranial hypertension.³³

Pediatric Considerations: Age-appropriate sedation scales (COMFORT-B, FLACC) and weight-based dosing protocols are essential. Children may require higher weight-based doses due to altered pharmacokinetics and higher metabolic rates.³⁴

Liberation from Sedation

Structured Weaning Protocols: Successful sedation liberation requires systematic approaches that address both pharmacological and psychological aspects of withdrawal:

Gradual Dose Reduction: 25-50% daily decreases for prolonged infusions
Conversion Strategies: Transition to intermittent dosing or longer-acting oral agents
Withdrawal Assessment: Use validated scales (WAM-ICU) to monitor symptoms
Psychological Support: Family presence, music therapy, chaplain services³⁵

Common Weaning Challenges:

Rebound anxiety and agitation
Sleep disturbances
Autonomic instability
Breakthrough pain

Quality Improvement and Metrics

Key Performance Indicators:

Percentage of patients at RASS goal
Daily sedation interruption compliance
Time to first awakening trial
Delirium incidence and duration
Unplanned extubation rates
ICU length of stay³⁶

Continuous Quality Improvement: Implement Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles to evaluate and improve sedation practices. Regular audit and feedback sessions help maintain protocol adherence and identify areas for improvement.

Clinical Pearls and Practical Hacks

Expert Pearls for Daily Practice

The "Sedation Sandwich": For procedures requiring brief deep sedation, use propofol boluses (0.5-1 mg/kg) sandwiched between lighter baseline sedation rather than escalating continuous infusions.
Pain First, Anxiety Second: Always address pain adequately before adding anxiolytic medications. The mnemonic "PAIN before BRAIN" reminds clinicians to prioritize analgesia.
The "Dexmedetomidine Bridge": When transitioning from high-dose benzodiazepine or propofol infusions, overlap with dexmedetomidine for 24-48 hours to smooth the transition and reduce withdrawal symptoms.
Circadian Rhythm Preservation: Implement "day/night dosing" where sedation is lighter during daytime hours (6 AM - 10 PM) and slightly deeper at night to promote natural sleep patterns.
Family as Co-therapists: Involve family members in sedation goals and delirium prevention. Familiar voices and faces provide powerful therapeutic interventions.

Troubleshooting Common Scenarios

Scenario 1: Ventilator Dysynchrony Despite Deep Sedation

Consider pain as primary driver
Evaluate ventilator settings and patient-ventilator interactions
Trial of neuromuscular blockade may be more appropriate than deeper sedation

Scenario 2: Agitation During Daily Sedation Interruption

Ensure adequate analgesia first
Environmental modifications (lighting, noise reduction)
Consider dexmedetomidine for its unique arousable sedation profile
Family presence during awakening trials

Scenario 3: Prolonged Sedation Offset

Assess for drug accumulation (renal/hepatic dysfunction)
Consider pharmacogenomic factors affecting metabolism
Evaluate for underlying metabolic or neurological conditions

Cost-Effectiveness Considerations

Economic Impact of Sedation Choices: While dexmedetomidine costs significantly more than traditional sedatives ($80-120/day vs $5-15/day for midazolam), the total cost of care may be reduced through shorter ICU stays, reduced delirium incidence, and improved long-term outcomes.³⁷

Resource Optimization Strategies:

Target dexmedetomidine use for high-risk patients (elderly, pre-existing cognitive impairment)
Implement early liberation protocols to minimize total drug exposure
Use generic formulations when clinically appropriate

Future Directions and Emerging Therapies

Precision Medicine Approaches

Pharmacogenomic testing may guide individualized sedation strategies based on genetic variations in drug metabolism (CYP2D6, CYP3A4 polymorphisms). While not yet standard practice, this approach shows promise for optimizing drug selection and dosing.³⁸

Novel Agents in Development

Remimazolam: An ultra-short acting benzodiazepine with organ-independent metabolism shows promise for procedural sedation and rapid recovery protocols.

Ciprofol: A novel GABA-A receptor modulator with improved hemodynamic profile compared to propofol is undergoing phase III trials.³⁹

Technology Integration

Artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms are being developed to predict optimal sedation strategies, identify patients at high risk for delirium, and optimize weaning protocols. Early pilot studies show promising results in reducing sedation variability and improving outcomes.⁴⁰

Conclusion

Modern ICU sedation practice requires a sophisticated understanding of pharmacology, patient physiology, and system-based approaches to care. The evolution from deep sedation protocols to lighter, more targeted strategies represents one of the most significant advances in critical care medicine over the past two decades.

Success in ICU sedation management depends on several key principles: individualized goal setting, regular reassessment, integration of non-pharmacological interventions, and systematic approaches to delirium prevention. The evidence clearly supports lighter sedation strategies that prioritize patient comfort while maintaining safety and facilitating recovery.

For postgraduate trainees in critical care, mastering these concepts requires both theoretical knowledge and practical experience. The art lies in balancing competing priorities while maintaining focus on patient-centered outcomes. As we continue to learn more about the long-term consequences of ICU care, our sedation practices must evolve to minimize iatrogenic harm while optimizing immediate and long-term patient outcomes.

The future of ICU sedation will likely involve more personalized approaches guided by genetic testing, continuous monitoring technologies, and artificial intelligence. However, the fundamental principles of careful assessment, individualized care, and multidisciplinary collaboration will remain central to optimal patient management.

References

Barr J, Fraser GL, Puntillo K, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of pain, agitation, and delirium in adult patients in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2013;41(1):263-306.
Devlin JW, Skrobik Y, Gélinas C, et al. Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the ICU. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(9):e825-e873.
Griffin CE 3rd, Kaye AM, Bueno FR, Kaye AD. Benzodiazepine pharmacology and central nervous system-mediated effects. Ochsner J. 2013;13(2):214-23.
Bauer TM, Ritz R, Haberthür C, et al. Prolonged sedation due to accumulation of conjugated metabolites of midazolam. Lancet. 1995;346(8968):145-7.
Pandharipande PP, Pun BT, Herr DL, et al. Effect of sedation with dexmedetomidine vs lorazepam on acute brain dysfunction in mechanically ventilated patients: the MENDS randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2007;298(22):2644-53.
Stanley TH. The fentanyl story. J Pain. 2014;15(12):1215-26.
Hughes MA, Glass PS, Jacobs JR. Context-sensitive half-time in multicompartment pharmacokinetic models for intravenous anesthetic drugs. Anesthesiology. 1992;76(3):334-41.
Çoruh B, Tonelli MR, Park DR. Fentanyl-induced chest wall rigidity. Chest. 2013;143(4):1145-6.
Keating GM. Dexmedetomidine: a review of its use for sedation in the intensive care setting. Drugs. 2015;75(10):1119-30.
Carollo DS, Nossaman BD, Ramadhyani U. Dexmedetomidine: a review of clinical applications. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2008;21(4):457-61.
Jakob SM, Ruokonen E, Grounds RM, et al. Dexmedetomidine vs midazolam or propofol for sedation during prolonged mechanical ventilation: two randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 2012;307(11):1151-60.
Tan JA, Ho KM. Use of dexmedetomidine as a sedative and analgesic agent in critically ill adult patients: a meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2010;36(6):926-39.
Sessler CN, Gosnell MS, Grap MJ, et al. The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: validity and reliability in adult intensive care unit patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;166(10):1338-44.
Shehabi Y, Bellomo R, Reade MC, et al. Early intensive care sedation predicts long-term mortality in ventilated critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012;186(8):724-31.
Olsen HT, Nedergaard HK, Strøm T, et al. Nonsedation or light sedation in critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(12):1103-11.
Girard TD, Kress JP, Fuchs BD, et al. Efficacy and safety of a paired sedation and ventilator weaning protocol for mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care (Awakening and Breathing Controlled trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2008;371(9607):126-34.
Kress JP, Pohlman AS, O'Connor MF, Hall JB. Daily interruption of sedative infusions in critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(20):1471-7.
Marra A, Ely EW, Pandharipande PP, Patel MB. The ABCDEF Bundle in Critical Care. Crit Care Clin. 2017;33(2):225-43.
Fraser GL, Devlin JW, Worby CP, et al. Benzodiazepine versus nonbenzodiazepine-based sedation for mechanically ventilated, critically ill adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Crit Care Med. 2013;41(9 Suppl 1):S30-8.
Herridge MS, Tansey CM, Matté A, et al. Functional disability 5 years after acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(14):1293-304.
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(2):541-8.
Nasraway SA, Wu EC, Kelleher RM, Yasuda CM, Donnelly AM. How reliable is the Bispectral Index in critically ill patients? A prospective, comparative, single-blinded observer study. Crit Care Med. 2002;30(7):1483-7.
Burry L, Rose L, McCullagh IJ, et al. Daily sedation interruption versus no daily sedation interruption for critically ill adult patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(7):CD009176.
Liu N, Chazot T, Genty A, et al. Titration of propofol for anesthetic induction and maintenance guided by the bispectral index: closed-loop versus manual control: a prospective, randomized, multicenter study. Anesthesiology. 2006;104(4):686-95.
Ely EW, Shintani A, Truman B, et al. Delirium as a predictor of mortality in mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit. JAMA. 2004;291(14):1753-62.
Pandharipande PP, Girard TD, Jackson JC, et al. Long-term cognitive impairment after critical illness. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(14):1306-16.
Ely EW, Margolin R, Francis J, et al. Evaluation of delirium in critically ill patients: validation of the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU). Crit Care Med. 2001;29(7):1370-9.
Barnes-Daly MA, Phillips G, Ely EW. Improving Hospital Survival and Reducing Brain Dysfunction at Seven California Community Hospitals: Implementing PAD Guidelines Via the ABCDEF Bundle. Crit Care Med. 2017;45(2):171-8.
Lewis SR, Pritchard MW, Schofield-Robinson OJ, et al. Melatonin for the promotion of sleep in adults in the intensive care unit. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;5(5):CD012455.
Girard TD, Pandharipande PP, Ely EW. Delirium in the intensive care unit. Crit Care. 2008;12 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):S3.
Devlin JW, Roberts RJ, Fong JJ, et al. Efficacy and safety of quetiapine in critically ill patients with delirium: a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study. Crit Care Med. 2010;38(2):419-27.
Mayo-Smith MF, Beecher LH, Fischer TL, et al. Management of alcohol withdrawal delirium. An evidence-based practice guideline. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164(13):1405-12.
Oddo M, Crippa IA, Mehta S, et al. Optimizing sedation in patients with acute brain injury. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):128.
Harris J, Ramelet AS, van Dijk M, et al. Clinical recommendations for pain, sedation, withdrawal and delirium assessment in critically ill infants and children: an ESPNIC position statement for healthcare professionals. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(6):972-86.
Best KM, Boullata JI, Curley MAQ. Risk factors associated with iatrogenic opioid and benzodiazepine withdrawal in critically ill pediatric patients: a systematic review and conceptual model. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2015;16(2):175-83.
Riker RR, Shehabi Y, Bokesch PM, et al. Dexmedetomidine vs midazolam for sedation of critically ill patients: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2009;301(5):489-99.
Dasta JF, Kane-Gill SL, Pencina M, Shehabi Y, Bokesch PM, Wisemandle W, et al. A cost-minimization analysis of dexmedetomidine compared with midazolam for long-term sedation in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2010;38(2):497-503.
Cascorbi I. Role of pharmacogenetics of ATP-binding cassette transporters in the pharmacokinetics of drugs. Pharmacol Ther. 2006;112(2):457-73.
Lohmer LL, Schippers F, Petersen KU, Stoehr T, Schmith VD. Time-to-event modeling for remimazolam for the indication of induction and maintenance of general anesthesia. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 2020;47(4):347-59.
Prasad V, Fojo T, Brada M. Precision oncology: origins, optimism, and potential. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(2):e81-6.

Tuesday, August 12, 2025

Optimizing Sedation and Analgesia in the ICU