Journal of critical care · 2019
The hospital-based evaluation of laxative prophylaxis in ICU (HELP-ICU): A pilot cluster-crossover randomized clinical trial.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hay Tyler, Deane Adam M, Rechnitzer Tom, Fetterplace Kate, Reilly Rebecca, Ankravs Melissa, Bailey Michael, Fazio Timothy, Anstey James, D'Costa Rohit, Presneill Jeffrey J, MacIsaac Christopher M, Bellomo Rinaldo
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Prophylactic laxative regimens may prevent constipation but may increase diarrhea and subsequent rectal tube insertion. Our aim was to compare three prophylactic laxative regimens on the rate of rectal tube insertion (primary outcome) and major constipation- or diarrhea-associated complications.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a cluster-crossover trial. Three pods in a single ICU were each randomized to one of three regimens for four months with rolling cross-over. All mechanically-ventilated and enterally-fed adult patients received either regimen: A) one coloxyl with senna BD from day one; B) two coloxyl with senna +20 ml lactulose BD commencing on day 3; or C) two coloxyl with senna tablets +20 ml lactulose BD commencing on day 6.
RESULTS: We enrolled 570 patients (A = 170, B = 205, C = 195) with similar baseline features. Overall, 53 (9.3%) patients received a rectal tube, and insertion rate was not statistically different between the three regimens (A = 12.9%, B = 7.8%, C = 7.7%; p = 0.15). The proportions of patients with other major constipation- or diarrhea-associated complications were similar, as were major patient-centred outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Earlier commencement of a prophylactic coloxyl-based laxative regimen (day 1 or 3) did not affect the rates of complications associated with constipation or diarrhea when compared to delayed introduction (day 6).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a cluster-crossover trial. Three pods in a single ICU were each randomized to one of three regimens for four months with rolling cross-over. All mechanically-ventilated and enterally-fed adult patients received either regimen: A) one coloxyl with senna BD from day one; B) two coloxyl with senna +20 ml lactulose BD commencing on day 3; or C) two coloxyl with senna tablets +20 ml lactulose BD commencing on day 6.
RESULTS: We enrolled 570 patients (A = 170, B = 205, C = 195) with similar baseline features. Overall, 53 (9.3%) patients received a rectal tube, and insertion rate was not statistically different between the three regimens (A = 12.9%, B = 7.8%, C = 7.7%; p = 0.15). The proportions of patients with other major constipation- or diarrhea-associated complications were similar, as were major patient-centred outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Earlier commencement of a prophylactic coloxyl-based laxative regimen (day 1 or 3) did not affect the rates of complications associated with constipation or diarrhea when compared to delayed introduction (day 6).