Loading…

Safety and Effectiveness of Sedation With Adjunctive Ketamine Versus Nonketamine Sedation in the Medical Intensive Care Unit

Background: Ketamine, an N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonist with sedative and analgesic properties, is becoming more popular as an adjunctive sedative in the critically ill patients. Methods: We conducted a single center, retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to the medical intensive...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of pharmacy practice 2021-12, Vol.34 (6), p.850-856
Main Authors: Jaeger, Melanie, Attridge, Rebecca L., Neff, Luke A., Gutierrez, G. Christina
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-de27e5030abd25e085e34a06ff821e20deb76a22860e7e9f9adb395df1a8c2c03
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-de27e5030abd25e085e34a06ff821e20deb76a22860e7e9f9adb395df1a8c2c03
container_end_page 856
container_issue 6
container_start_page 850
container_title Journal of pharmacy practice
container_volume 34
creator Jaeger, Melanie
Attridge, Rebecca L.
Neff, Luke A.
Gutierrez, G. Christina
description Background: Ketamine, an N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonist with sedative and analgesic properties, is becoming more popular as an adjunctive sedative in the critically ill patients. Methods: We conducted a single center, retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) between 2013 and 2018. Patients who received continuous infusion ketamine or nonketamine sedatives (NKS) including dexmedetomidine, fentanyl, midazolam, or propofol were identified. The primary outcome was percentage of Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) scores at goal in patients receiving ketamine as adjunct to NKS compared to those on NKS alone. Results: A total of 172 patients were included (n = 86 ketamine, n = 86 NKS). Baseline characteristics were similar with the exception of antipsychotic use, which was higher in the ketamine group (P = .008). Percentage of RASS scores at goal was not different between groups (78.7% vs 81.4%, P = .29). Fewer patients in the ketamine group received continuous infusion fentanyl (76.7% vs 94.2%, P = .002). Patients on adjunctive ketamine required fewer days of intermittent benzodiazepines (0 [0-1] vs 1 [1-2], P < .0001). Patients receiving ketamine required less norepinephrine, receiving a median of 6.32 mg (2.4-20) versus 11.7 mg (5.2-45.2; P = .03). There was no difference in receipt of new antipsychotics or occurrence of arrhythmias. Conclusion: Addition of ketamine did not increase the percentage of RASS scores at goal versus NKS but was well tolerated. Ketamine was associated with reductions in norepinephrine requirements, days of intermittent benzodiazepine administration, and number of patients receiving continuous infusion fentanyl. Continuous infusion ketamine appears safe and effective for sedation in the MICU.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/0897190020925932
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>sage_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_0897190020925932</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0897190020925932</sage_id><sourcerecordid>10.1177_0897190020925932</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-de27e5030abd25e085e34a06ff821e20deb76a22860e7e9f9adb395df1a8c2c03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE9PAjEUxBujEUTvnky_wGr_ULo9EoJKRD0getx0t69ShC7Zdk1I_PDuinAw8fSSmflN8gahS0quKZXyhqRKUkUII4oJxdkR6lLBaUIVl8eo29pJ63fQWQjLJkf7nJ2iDmd9kcqB6KKvmbYQt1h7g8fWQhHdJ3gIAZcWz8Do6EqP31xc4KFZ1v7Hxw8Q9dp5wK9QhTrgp9J_7KUD5DyOC8CPYFyhV3jiI_jQ0iNdAZ57F8_RidWrABe_t4fmt-OX0X0yfb6bjIbTpOBcxsQAkyAIJzo3TABJBfC-JgNrU0aBEQO5HGjG0gEBCcoqbXKuhLFUpwUrCO8hsustqjKECmy2qdxaV9uMkqwdMvs7ZINc7ZBNna_BHID9ck0g2QWCfodsWdaVb174v_AbeIt8nA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Safety and Effectiveness of Sedation With Adjunctive Ketamine Versus Nonketamine Sedation in the Medical Intensive Care Unit</title><source>SAGE</source><creator>Jaeger, Melanie ; Attridge, Rebecca L. ; Neff, Luke A. ; Gutierrez, G. Christina</creator><creatorcontrib>Jaeger, Melanie ; Attridge, Rebecca L. ; Neff, Luke A. ; Gutierrez, G. Christina</creatorcontrib><description>Background: Ketamine, an N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonist with sedative and analgesic properties, is becoming more popular as an adjunctive sedative in the critically ill patients. Methods: We conducted a single center, retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) between 2013 and 2018. Patients who received continuous infusion ketamine or nonketamine sedatives (NKS) including dexmedetomidine, fentanyl, midazolam, or propofol were identified. The primary outcome was percentage of Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) scores at goal in patients receiving ketamine as adjunct to NKS compared to those on NKS alone. Results: A total of 172 patients were included (n = 86 ketamine, n = 86 NKS). Baseline characteristics were similar with the exception of antipsychotic use, which was higher in the ketamine group (P = .008). Percentage of RASS scores at goal was not different between groups (78.7% vs 81.4%, P = .29). Fewer patients in the ketamine group received continuous infusion fentanyl (76.7% vs 94.2%, P = .002). Patients on adjunctive ketamine required fewer days of intermittent benzodiazepines (0 [0-1] vs 1 [1-2], P &lt; .0001). Patients receiving ketamine required less norepinephrine, receiving a median of 6.32 mg (2.4-20) versus 11.7 mg (5.2-45.2; P = .03). There was no difference in receipt of new antipsychotics or occurrence of arrhythmias. Conclusion: Addition of ketamine did not increase the percentage of RASS scores at goal versus NKS but was well tolerated. Ketamine was associated with reductions in norepinephrine requirements, days of intermittent benzodiazepine administration, and number of patients receiving continuous infusion fentanyl. Continuous infusion ketamine appears safe and effective for sedation in the MICU.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0897-1900</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-1937</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0897190020925932</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32458765</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Humans ; Hypnotics and Sedatives - adverse effects ; Intensive Care Units ; Ketamine - adverse effects ; Respiration, Artificial ; Retrospective Studies</subject><ispartof>Journal of pharmacy practice, 2021-12, Vol.34 (6), p.850-856</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-de27e5030abd25e085e34a06ff821e20deb76a22860e7e9f9adb395df1a8c2c03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-de27e5030abd25e085e34a06ff821e20deb76a22860e7e9f9adb395df1a8c2c03</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1020-6307</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923,79134</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32458765$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jaeger, Melanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Attridge, Rebecca L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Neff, Luke A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gutierrez, G. Christina</creatorcontrib><title>Safety and Effectiveness of Sedation With Adjunctive Ketamine Versus Nonketamine Sedation in the Medical Intensive Care Unit</title><title>Journal of pharmacy practice</title><addtitle>J Pharm Pract</addtitle><description>Background: Ketamine, an N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonist with sedative and analgesic properties, is becoming more popular as an adjunctive sedative in the critically ill patients. Methods: We conducted a single center, retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) between 2013 and 2018. Patients who received continuous infusion ketamine or nonketamine sedatives (NKS) including dexmedetomidine, fentanyl, midazolam, or propofol were identified. The primary outcome was percentage of Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) scores at goal in patients receiving ketamine as adjunct to NKS compared to those on NKS alone. Results: A total of 172 patients were included (n = 86 ketamine, n = 86 NKS). Baseline characteristics were similar with the exception of antipsychotic use, which was higher in the ketamine group (P = .008). Percentage of RASS scores at goal was not different between groups (78.7% vs 81.4%, P = .29). Fewer patients in the ketamine group received continuous infusion fentanyl (76.7% vs 94.2%, P = .002). Patients on adjunctive ketamine required fewer days of intermittent benzodiazepines (0 [0-1] vs 1 [1-2], P &lt; .0001). Patients receiving ketamine required less norepinephrine, receiving a median of 6.32 mg (2.4-20) versus 11.7 mg (5.2-45.2; P = .03). There was no difference in receipt of new antipsychotics or occurrence of arrhythmias. Conclusion: Addition of ketamine did not increase the percentage of RASS scores at goal versus NKS but was well tolerated. Ketamine was associated with reductions in norepinephrine requirements, days of intermittent benzodiazepine administration, and number of patients receiving continuous infusion fentanyl. Continuous infusion ketamine appears safe and effective for sedation in the MICU.</description><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hypnotics and Sedatives - adverse effects</subject><subject>Intensive Care Units</subject><subject>Ketamine - adverse effects</subject><subject>Respiration, Artificial</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><issn>0897-1900</issn><issn>1531-1937</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kE9PAjEUxBujEUTvnky_wGr_ULo9EoJKRD0getx0t69ShC7Zdk1I_PDuinAw8fSSmflN8gahS0quKZXyhqRKUkUII4oJxdkR6lLBaUIVl8eo29pJ63fQWQjLJkf7nJ2iDmd9kcqB6KKvmbYQt1h7g8fWQhHdJ3gIAZcWz8Do6EqP31xc4KFZ1v7Hxw8Q9dp5wK9QhTrgp9J_7KUD5DyOC8CPYFyhV3jiI_jQ0iNdAZ57F8_RidWrABe_t4fmt-OX0X0yfb6bjIbTpOBcxsQAkyAIJzo3TABJBfC-JgNrU0aBEQO5HGjG0gEBCcoqbXKuhLFUpwUrCO8hsustqjKECmy2qdxaV9uMkqwdMvs7ZINc7ZBNna_BHID9ck0g2QWCfodsWdaVb174v_AbeIt8nA</recordid><startdate>202112</startdate><enddate>202112</enddate><creator>Jaeger, Melanie</creator><creator>Attridge, Rebecca L.</creator><creator>Neff, Luke A.</creator><creator>Gutierrez, G. Christina</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1020-6307</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202112</creationdate><title>Safety and Effectiveness of Sedation With Adjunctive Ketamine Versus Nonketamine Sedation in the Medical Intensive Care Unit</title><author>Jaeger, Melanie ; Attridge, Rebecca L. ; Neff, Luke A. ; Gutierrez, G. Christina</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-de27e5030abd25e085e34a06ff821e20deb76a22860e7e9f9adb395df1a8c2c03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hypnotics and Sedatives - adverse effects</topic><topic>Intensive Care Units</topic><topic>Ketamine - adverse effects</topic><topic>Respiration, Artificial</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jaeger, Melanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Attridge, Rebecca L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Neff, Luke A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gutierrez, G. Christina</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Journal of pharmacy practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jaeger, Melanie</au><au>Attridge, Rebecca L.</au><au>Neff, Luke A.</au><au>Gutierrez, G. Christina</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Safety and Effectiveness of Sedation With Adjunctive Ketamine Versus Nonketamine Sedation in the Medical Intensive Care Unit</atitle><jtitle>Journal of pharmacy practice</jtitle><addtitle>J Pharm Pract</addtitle><date>2021-12</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>850</spage><epage>856</epage><pages>850-856</pages><issn>0897-1900</issn><eissn>1531-1937</eissn><abstract>Background: Ketamine, an N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonist with sedative and analgesic properties, is becoming more popular as an adjunctive sedative in the critically ill patients. Methods: We conducted a single center, retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) between 2013 and 2018. Patients who received continuous infusion ketamine or nonketamine sedatives (NKS) including dexmedetomidine, fentanyl, midazolam, or propofol were identified. The primary outcome was percentage of Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) scores at goal in patients receiving ketamine as adjunct to NKS compared to those on NKS alone. Results: A total of 172 patients were included (n = 86 ketamine, n = 86 NKS). Baseline characteristics were similar with the exception of antipsychotic use, which was higher in the ketamine group (P = .008). Percentage of RASS scores at goal was not different between groups (78.7% vs 81.4%, P = .29). Fewer patients in the ketamine group received continuous infusion fentanyl (76.7% vs 94.2%, P = .002). Patients on adjunctive ketamine required fewer days of intermittent benzodiazepines (0 [0-1] vs 1 [1-2], P &lt; .0001). Patients receiving ketamine required less norepinephrine, receiving a median of 6.32 mg (2.4-20) versus 11.7 mg (5.2-45.2; P = .03). There was no difference in receipt of new antipsychotics or occurrence of arrhythmias. Conclusion: Addition of ketamine did not increase the percentage of RASS scores at goal versus NKS but was well tolerated. Ketamine was associated with reductions in norepinephrine requirements, days of intermittent benzodiazepine administration, and number of patients receiving continuous infusion fentanyl. Continuous infusion ketamine appears safe and effective for sedation in the MICU.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>32458765</pmid><doi>10.1177/0897190020925932</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1020-6307</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0897-1900
ispartof Journal of pharmacy practice, 2021-12, Vol.34 (6), p.850-856
issn 0897-1900
1531-1937
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_0897190020925932
source SAGE
subjects Humans
Hypnotics and Sedatives - adverse effects
Intensive Care Units
Ketamine - adverse effects
Respiration, Artificial
Retrospective Studies
title Safety and Effectiveness of Sedation With Adjunctive Ketamine Versus Nonketamine Sedation in the Medical Intensive Care Unit
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T00%3A51%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-sage_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Safety%20and%20Effectiveness%20of%20Sedation%20With%20Adjunctive%20Ketamine%20Versus%20Nonketamine%20Sedation%20in%20the%20Medical%20Intensive%20Care%20Unit&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20pharmacy%20practice&rft.au=Jaeger,%20Melanie&rft.date=2021-12&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=850&rft.epage=856&rft.pages=850-856&rft.issn=0897-1900&rft.eissn=1531-1937&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0897190020925932&rft_dat=%3Csage_cross%3E10.1177_0897190020925932%3C/sage_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-de27e5030abd25e085e34a06ff821e20deb76a22860e7e9f9adb395df1a8c2c03%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/32458765&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0897190020925932&rfr_iscdi=true