Safety of dexmedetomidine for the control of agitation in critically ill traumatic brain injury patients: a descriptive study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Behavioural disturbances such as agitation are common following traumatic brain injury and can interfere with treatments, cause self-harm and delay rehabilitation. As there is a lack of evidence on the optimal approach to manage agitation in recovering TBI patients, various pharmacological agents are used including antipsychotics, anticonvulsants and sedative agents. Among sedatives, the safety and efficacy of dexmedetomidine to control agitation in traumatic brain injury patients is not well documented. OBJECTIVE: To describe the safety, use and efficacy of dexmedetomidine for the management of agitation following traumatic brain injury in the intensive care unit. METHODS: Medical records of all patients admitted to the intensive care unit of the Hôpital Sacré-Coeur de Montréal for a traumatic brain injury who received dexmedetomidine for agitation between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2017 were reviewed. Patients who received dexmedetomidine for indications other than agitation were excluded. Data on dexmedetomidine prescription practices and safety were extracted. Frequency of agitation and concomitant psychoactive medication use was explored over a period starting two days prior to the initiation of dexmedetomidine to six days after or discontinuation, whichever came first. RESULTS: percentiles: 3-6) and a mean average rate of 0.62 mcg/kg/h (SD 0.25). Although hypotension (76%) and bradycardia (54%) were common, only one patient required intervention. The proportion of patients with at least one episode of agitation decreased from 100% on day 0, to 88%, 69% and 63% on days 1, 2 and 3 of dexmedetomidine, respectively. The decrease was statistically significant difference between days 0 and 2 as well as between days 0 and 3. Concomitant use of propofol and benzodiazepines also decreased over the course of dexmedetomidine treatment. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine use was safe and associated with a reduction in agitation in traumatic brain injury patients in the 96 hours following its initiation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".