ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
Year : 2023 | Volume
: 7
| Issue : 1 | Page : 1-7 |
|
Sedation and analgesia practices of pediatric intensivists in Saudi Arabia
Mohammed Ali Bakhsh1, Mohamed Osman M. Humoodi2, Abdullah M Alzahrani1, Sara M Osman2, Razan Babakr2, Nada Townsi2, Maha A Azzam1
1 Department of Pediatrics, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Ministry of National Guard-Health Affairs; King Abdullah International Medical Research Centre; Department of Pediatrics, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia 2 Department of Pediatrics, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Ministry of National Guard-Health Affairs; King Abdullah International Medical Research Centre, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Correspondence Address:
Mohamed Osman M. Humoodi Department of Pediatrics, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Ministry of National Guard-Health Affairs, Jeddah Saudi Arabia
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/sccj.sccj_25_22
|
|
Background: Sedation practices in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) vary significantly worldwide. This study aimed to explore the current sedation and analgesia practices among paediatric intensivists in Saudi Arabia. Methods: This web-based survey was conducted among pediatric intensive care physicians in Saudi Arabia. The survey investigated the participating PICUs, physicians' demographic data, and sedation/analgesia practices. Results: Of the 160 physicians included, the response rate was 67% (n = 108). Of the 100 participants who provided location information, 51% (n = 51) were from the central region of Saudi Arabia. Approximately two-thirds of the participants were consultants, and 48.1% had >10 years of experience. Most respondents practised in general PICUs and routinely assessed sedation and analgesia levels. The COMFORT-Behavior and Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability scales were popular (42.6%). More than half of the respondents (52/98) did not practice daily sedation interruption. Furthermore, 78.3% of the respondents assessed patients for withdrawal, whereas only 25% used delirium screening scores. Infusions were preferred over interrupted doses to provide comfort for mechanically ventilated patients. The first-choice infusions were midazolam for sedation and fentanyl for analgesia. Dexmedetomidine was preferred when a third agent was required. Sedation protocols were used by 41.2% of the respondents and were mainly physician-led (75.2%). Various nonpharmacological measures were used to provide patient comfort, and parents often participated in their application. Conclusions: The practice of sedation varies significantly between pediatric intensivists, and formal assessment for delirium is infrequently done in PICUs in Saudi Arabia.
|
|
|
|
[FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|