Sedation and Analgesia Usage in Severe Pandemic H1N1 (2009) Infection: A Comparison to Respiratory Failure Secondary to Other Infectious Pneumonias
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: During the 2009 H1N1 pandemic (pH1N1), patients requiring mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure received high doses of sedation and analgesia. OBJECTIVE: To examine sedation and analgesia use among patients with respiratory failure due to severe pH1N1 infection compared to other infectious pneumonias. METHODS: In this observational cohort study of intensive care unit (ICU) patients with respiratory failure, we compared doses of sedatives and analgesics administered to patients with pH1N1, non-pH1N1 viral pneumonia, and adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) secondary to bacterial pneumonia, on days 1, 3, 7, 14, and 28 of ICU admission. Cumulative drug use, daily drug use, and weight-adjusted medication doses were examined. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 37 patients with pH1N1 infection, 22 patients with non-pH1N1 viral pneumonia, and 46 patients with ARDS secondary to bacterial pneumonia. To achieve similar levels of sedation using the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale, patients with pH1N1 were administered the highest cumulative median doses of fentanyl (11,230 μg; interquartile range [IQR] 3240-21,000), compared to 2400 μg (IQR 130-7130) in viral pneumonia and 2880 μg (IQR 600-6950) in ARDS (p < 0.001). Patients with pH1N1 were also administered the highest cumulative median doses of midazolam at 820 mg (IQR 330-1160), compared to 160 mg (IQR 20-390) in viral pneumonia and 160 mg (IQR 20-480 mg) in ARDS (p < 0.001). The pH1N1 group received the highest median daily fentanyl and midazolam doses on all study days. The pH1N1 group did not differ significantly in cumulative propofol dose compared with the other 2 study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Sedative and analgesic use may be uniquely higher in critically ill patients with pH1N1 infection compared to patients with other infectious pneumonias. This finding may be important for resource planning in future pandemics. Further study is required to explore the underlying mechanisms for potentially higher sedative and analgesic requirements in this patient population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".