dc.contributor.author
Paul, Nicolas
dc.contributor.author
Grunow, Julius J.
dc.contributor.author
Rosenthal, Max
dc.contributor.author
Spies, Claudia D.
dc.contributor.author
Page, Valerie J.
dc.contributor.author
Hanison, James
dc.contributor.author
Patel, Brijesh
dc.contributor.author
Rosenberg, Alex
dc.contributor.author
von Haken, Rebecca
dc.contributor.author
Pietsch, Urs
dc.contributor.author
Schrag, Claudia
dc.contributor.author
Waydhas, Christian
dc.contributor.author
Schellongowski, Peter
dc.contributor.author
Lobmeyr, Elisabeth
dc.contributor.author
Sander, Michael
dc.contributor.author
Piper, Sophie K.
dc.contributor.author
Conway, Daniel
dc.contributor.author
Totzeck, Andreas
dc.contributor.author
Weiss, Björn
dc.date.accessioned
2025-11-05T12:14:40Z
dc.date.available
2025-11-05T12:14:40Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/50147
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-49872
dc.description.abstract
Background: The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of a structured educational intervention on the implementation of guideline-recommended pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD) assessment. Methods: This was a prospective, multinational, interventional before-after trial conducted at 12 intensive care units from 10 centers in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and the UK. Intensive care units underwent a 6-week structured educational program, comprising online lectures, instructional videos, educational handouts, and bedside teaching. Patient-level PAD assessment data were collected in three 1-day point-prevalence assessments before (T1), 6 weeks after (T2), and 1 year after (T3) the educational program. Results: A total of 430 patients were included. The rate of patients who received all three PAD assessments changed from 55% (107/195) at T1 to 53% (68/129) at T2, but increased to 73% (77/106) at T3 (p = 0.003). The delirium screening rate increased from 64% (124/195) at T1 to 65% (84/129) at T2 and 77% (82/106) at T3 (p = 0.041). The pain assessment rate increased from 87% (170/195) at T1 to 92% (119/129) at T2 and 98% (104/106) at T3 (p = 0.005). The rate of sedation assessment showed no signficiant change. The proportion of patients who received nonpharmacological delirium prevention measures increased from 58% (114/195) at T1 to 80% (103/129) at T2 and 91% (96/106) at T3 (p < 0.001). Multivariable regression revealed that at T3, patients were more likely to receive a delirium assessment (odds ratio [OR] 2.138, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.206-3.790; p = 0.009), sedation assessment (OR 4.131, 95% CI 1.372-12.438; p = 0.012), or all three PAD assessments (OR 2.295, 95% CI 1.349-3.903; p = 0.002) compared with T1. Conclusions: In routine care, many patients were not assessed for PAD. Assessment rates increased significantly 1 year after the intervention.
en
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject
Critical care
en
dc.subject
Delivery of health care
en
dc.subject
Intensive care units
en
dc.subject.ddc
600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften::610 Medizin und Gesundheit::610 Medizin und Gesundheit
dc.title
Enhancing European Management of Analgesia, Sedation, and Delirium: A Multinational, Prospective, Interventional Before-After Trial
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.1007/s12028-023-01837-8
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitle
Neurocritical Care
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.number
3
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishername
Springer Nature
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pagestart
898
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pageend
908
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume
40
refubium.affiliation
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
refubium.funding
Springer Nature DEAL
refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pmid
37697129
dcterms.isPartOf.issn
1541-6933
dcterms.isPartOf.eissn
1556-0961