We found substantial agreement among a large, interdisciplinary cohort of international experts regarding evidence supporting recommendations, and the remaining literature gaps in the assessment, prevention, and treatment of Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) in critically ill adults. Highlighting this evidence and the research needs will improve Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) management and provide the foundation for improved outcomes and science in this vulnerable population.

Objective The debilitating and persistent effects of intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired delirium and weakness warrant testing of prevention strategies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of implementing the Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management, and Early exercise/mobility (ABCDE) bundle into everyday practice. Design Eighteen-month, prospective, cohort, before-after study conducted between November 2010 and May 2012. Setting Five adult ICUs, one step-down unit, and one oncology/hematology special care unit located in a 624-bed tertiary medical center. Patients Two hundred ninety-six patients (146 pre- and 150 post-bundle implementation), age ≥ 19 years, managed by the institutions’ medical or surgical critical care service. Interventions ABCDE bundle. Measurements For mechanically ventilated patients (n = 187), we examined the association between bundle implementation and ventilator-free days. For all patients, we used regression models to quantify the relationship between ABCDE bundle implementation and the prevalence/duration of delirium and coma, early mobilization, mortality, time to discharge, and change in residence. Safety outcomes and bundle adherence were monitored. Main Results Patients in the post-implementation period spent three more days breathing without mechanical assistance than did those in the pre-implementation period (median [IQR], 24 [7 to 26] vs. 21 [0 to 25]; p = 0.04). After adjusting for age, sex, severity of illness, comorbidity, and mechanical ventilation status, patients managed with the ABCDE bundle experienced a near halving of the odds of delirium (odds ratio [OR], 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33–0.93; p = 0.03) and increased odds of mobilizing out of bed at least once during an ICU stay (OR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.29–3.45; p = 0.003). No significant differences were noted in self-extubation or reintubation rates. Conclusions Critically ill patients managed with the ABCDE bundle spent three more days breathing without assistance, experienced less delirium, and were more likely to be mobilized during their ICU stay than patients treated with usual care.

Objective: Decades-old, common ICU practices including deep sedation, immobilization, and limited family access are being challenged. We endeavoured to evaluate the relationship between ABCDEF bundle performance and patient-centered outcomes in critical care. Design: Prospective, multicenter, cohort study from a national quality improvement collaborative. Setting: 68 academic, community, and federal ICUs collected data during a 20-month period. Patients: 15,226 adults with at least one ICU day. Interventions: We defined ABCDEF bundle performance (our main exposure) in two ways: 1) complete performance (patient received every eligible bundle element on any given day) and 2) proportional performance (percentage of eligible bundle elements performed on any given day). We explored the association between complete and proportional ABCDEF bundle performance and three sets of outcomes: patient-related (mortality, ICU hospital discharge), symptom-related (mechanical ventilation, coma, delirium, pain, restraint use), and system-related (ICU readmission, discharge destination). All models were adjusted for a minimum of 18 a priori determined potential confounders. Measurements and Results: Complete ABCDEF bundle performance was associated with lower likelihood of seven outcomes: hospital death within 7 days (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.32; CI, 0.17–0.62), next-day mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.28; CI, 0.22–0.36), coma (AOR, 0.35; CI, 0.22–0.56), delirium (AOR, 0.60; CI, 0.49–0.72), physical restraint use (AOR, 0.37; CI, 0.30–0.46), ICU readmission (AOR, 0.54; CI, 0.37–0.79), and discharge to a facility other than home (AOR, 0.64; CI, 0.51–0.80). There was a consistent dose-response relationship between higher proportional bundle performance and improvements in each of the above-mentioned clinical outcomes (all p < 0.002). Significant pain was more frequently reported as bundle performance proportionally increased (p = 0.0001). Conclusions: ABCDEF bundle performance showed significant and clinically meaningful improvements in outcomes including survival, mechanical ventilation use, coma and delirium, restraint-free care, ICU readmissions, and post-ICU discharge disposition.

Objective The Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management and Early exercise/mobility (ABCDE) bundle is an evidence-based, interprofessional, multicomponent strategy for minimizing sedative exposure, reducing duration of mechanical ventilation and managing intensive care unit (ICU) acquired delirium and weakness. The purpose of this study was to identify facilitators and barriers to ABCDE bundle adoption and to evaluate the extent to which bundle implementation was effective, sustainable, and conducive to dissemination. Design Prospective, before-after, mixed-methods study. Setting Five adult ICUs, 1 step-down unit, and a special care unit located in a 624 bed, academic medical center Subjects Interprofessional ICU team members at participating institution. Interventions and Measurements In collaboration with the participating institution, we developed, implemented, and refined an ABCDE bundle policy. Over the course of an 18 month period, all ICU team members were offered the opportunity to participate in numerous, multimodal educational efforts. Three focus group sessions, 3 online surveys, and 1 educational evaluation were administered in an attempt to identify facilitators and barriers to bundle adoption. Main Results Factors believed to facilitate bundle implementation included: 1) the performance of daily, interdisciplinary, rounds, 2) engagement of key implementation leaders, 3) sustained and diverse educational efforts, and 4) the bundle's quality and strength. Barriers identified included: 1) intervention related issues (e.g. timing of trials, fear of adverse events), 2) communication and care coordination challenges, 3) knowledge deficits, 4) workload concerns, and 5) documentation burden. Despite these challenges, participants believed implementation ultimately benefited patients, improved interdisciplinary communication, and empowered nurses and other ICU team members. Conclusions In this study of the implementation of the ABCDE bundle in a tertiary care setting, clear factors were identified that both advanced and impeded adoption of this complex intervention that requires interprofessional education, coordination, and cooperation. Focusing on these factors preemptively should enable a more effective and lasting implementation of the bundle and better care for critically ill patients. Lessons learned from this study will also help healthcare providers optimize implementation of the recent ICU Pain, Agitation and Delirium (PAD) Guidelines, which has many similarities but also some important differences as compared to the ABCDE bundle

IntroductionDespite recommendations from professional societies and patient safety organizations, the majority of ICU patients worldwide are not routinely monitored for delirium, thus preventing timely prevention and management. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize what types of implementation strategies have been tested to improve ICU clinicians’ ability to effectively assess, prevent and treat delirium and to evaluate the effect of these strategies on clinical outcomes.MethodWe searched PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO, Cochrane and CINAHL (January 2000 and April 2014) for studies on implementation strategies that included delirium-oriented interventions in adult ICU patients. Studies were suitable for inclusion if implementation strategies’ efficacy, in terms of a clinical outcome, or process outcome was described.ResultsWe included 21 studies, all including process measures, while 9 reported both process measures and clinical outcomes. Some individual strategies such as “audit and feedback” and “tailored interventions” may be important to establish clinical outcome improvements, but otherwise robust data on effectiveness of specific implementation strategies were scarce. Successful implementation interventions were frequently reported to change process measures, such as improvements in adherence to delirium screening with up to 92%, but relating process measures to outcome changes was generally not possible. In meta-analyses, reduced mortality and ICU length of stay reduction were statistically more likely with implementation programs that employed more (six or more) rather than less implementation strategies and when a framework was used that either integrated current evidence on pain, agitation and delirium management (PAD) or when a strategy of early awakening, breathing, delirium screening and early exercise (ABCDE bundle) was employed. Using implementation strategies aimed at organizational change, next to behavioral change, was also associated with reduced mortality.ConclusionOur findings may indicate that multi-component implementation programs with a higher number of strategies targeting ICU delirium assessment, prevention and treatment and integrated within PAD or ABCDE bundle have the potential to improve clinical outcomes. However, prospective confirmation of these findings is needed to inform the most effective implementation practice with regard to integrated delirium management and such research should clearly delineate effective practice change from improvements in clinical outcomes.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0886-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

Imagine working in an environment where all patients undergoing mechanical ventilation are alert, calm, and delirium free. Envision practicing in an environment where nonvocal patients can effectively express their need for better pain control, repositioning, or emotional reassurance. Picture an intensive care unit where a nurse-led, interprofessional team practices evidence-based, patient-centered care focused on preserving and/or restoring their clients’ physical, functional, and neurocognitive abilities. A recently proposed bundle of practices for the intensive care unit could advance the current practice environment toward this idealized environment. The Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium Monitoring and Management, and Early Mobility (ABCDE) bundle incorporates the best available evidence related to delirium, immobility, sedation/analgesia, and ventilator management in the intensive care unit for adoption into everyday clinical practice.

Enhanced performance of paired, daily SATs and SBTs is associated with lower VAE rates. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01583413).