Austin Health

Title
Agitation during anaesthetic emergence: An observational study of adult cardiac surgery patients in two Australian intensive care units.
Publication Date
2024-01
Author(s)
Heily, Meredith
Gerdtz, Marie
Jarden, Rebecca J.
Yap, Celene Yl
Darvall, Jai
Coventry, Andrew Ej
Rogers, Amy
Vernon, Julie
Bellomo, Rinaldo
Subject
Adults
Agitation
Anaesthetic emergence
Cardiac surgery
Intensive care unit
Observational study
Patients
Type of document
Journal Article
OrcId
#PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#
#PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#
#PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#
#PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#
#PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#
#PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#
#PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#
#PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#
#PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#
DOI
10.1016/j.aucc.2023.09.003
Abstract
Anaesthetic emergence agitation among adult patients being recovered after open cardiac and/or thoracic aorta surgery has not been described. The objective of this study was to characterise emergence agitation in terms of incidence, clinical features, and consequences in a cohort of cardiac surgery patients being recovered in the intensive care unit (ICU). A prospective, observational pilot study was implemented. Over a 5-week period, the study was conducted in two metropolitan hospitals in Victoria, Australia. The cohort comprised all patients admitted to the ICUs aged ≥18 years, who had undergone cardiac surgery via an open sternotomy with general anaesthetic, and whose emergence was directly observed. Emergence agitation was defined as a Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale score of ≥+2. Fifty patients were observed. Emergence agitation occurred in 24/50 (48%) of patients. Patients with emergence agitation experienced more clinical consequences than patients with calm emergence, including a significantly greater number of episodes of airway compromise (12/24, 50%, p < 0.001); ventilator dyssynchrony (23/24, 96%, p = 0.004); and hypertension (13/24, 54%, p = 0.004). Significant treatment interference (potentially dangerous patient movements such as pulling tubes) occurred with 23/24 patients (96%, p < 0.0001). Patients who underwent emergence agitation required significantly more interventions during anaesthetic emergence than patients who underwent a calm emergence. Interventions included extra nursing measures (16/24, 67%, p = 0.001) administration of sedative and/or opioid intravenous boluses (22/24, 92%, p = 0.001) and vasoactive agents (15/24, 63%, p = 0.05). In patients recovering from cardiac surgery in the ICU, emergence agitation was clinically important. Immediate interventions were required to prevent and manage complications.
Link
Citation
Australian Critical Care: Official Journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses 2024-01; 37(1)
Jornal Title
Australian Critical Care : Official Journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses

Files:

NameSizeformatDescriptionLink