BACKGROUND: Agitation occurs frequently among criticaly il patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). We aimed to evaluate the frequency, predisposing factors and outcomes of agitation in trauma ICU. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted to include patients who were admitted to the trauma ICU between April 2014 and March 2015. Data included patient's demographics, initial vitals, associated injuries, Ramsey Sedation Scale, Glasgow Coma Scale, head injury lesions, use of sedatives and analgesics, head interventions, ventilator days, and ICU length of stay. Patients were divided into two groups based on the agitation status. RESULTS: A total of 102 intubated patients were enrolled; of which 46 (45％) experienced agitation. Patients in the agitation group were 7 years younger, had significantly lower GCS and sustained higher frequency of head injuries (P<0.05). Patients who developed agitation were more likely to be prescribed propofol alone or in combination with midazolam and to have frequent ICP catheter insertion, longer ventilatory days and higher incidence of pneumonia (P<0.05). On multivariate analysis, use of propofol alone (OR=4.97; 95％CI=1.35–18.27), subarachnoid hemorrhage (OR=5.11; 95％CI=1.38–18.91) and ICP catheter insertion for severe head injury (OR=4.23; 95％CI=1.16–15.35) were independent predictors for agitation (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Agitation is a frequent problem in trauma ICU and is mainly related to the type of sedation and poor outcomes in terms of prolonged mechanical ventilation and development of nosocomial pneumonia. Therefore, understanding the main predictors of agitation facilitates early risk-stratification and development of better therapeutic strategies in trauma patients.

BACKGROUND:We sought to evaluate the risk factors for developing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and whether the location of intubation posed a risk in trauma patients. METHODS:Data were retrospectively reviewed for adult trauma patients requiring intubation for > 48 hours, admitted between 2010 and 2013. Patients' demographics, clinical presentations and outcomes were compared according to intubation location (prehospital intubation [PHI] vs. trauma room [TRI]) and presence vs. absence of VAP. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of VAP. RESULTS:Of 471 intubated patients, 332 patients met the inclusion criteria (124 had PHI and 208 had TRI) with a mean age of 30.7±14.8 years. PHI group had lower GCS (P=0.001), respiratory rate (P=0.001), and higher frequency of head (P=0.02) and chest injuries (P=0.04). The rate of VAP in PHI group was comparable to the TRI group (P=0.60). Patients who developed VAP were 6 years older, had significantly lower GCS and higher ISS, head AIS, and higher rates of polytrauma. The overall mortality was 7.5％, and was not associated with intubation location or pneumonia rates. In the early-VAP group, gram-positive pathogens were more common, while gram-negative microorganisms were more frequently encountered in the late VAP group. Logistic regression analysis and modeling showed that the impact of the location of intubation in predicting the risk of VAP appeared only when chest injury was included in the models. CONCLUSION:In trauma, the risk of developing VAP is multifactorial. However, the location of intubation and presence of chest injury could play an important role.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe the current practice of emergency physicians and anaesthesiologists in the selection of drugs for rapid-sequence induction (RSI) among trauma patients. METHODS: A prospective survey audit was conducted based on a self-administered questionnaire among two intubating specialties. The preferred type and dose of hypnotics, opioids, and muscle relaxants used for RSI in trauma patients were sought in the questionnaire. Data were compared for the use of induction agent, opioid use and muscle relaxant among stable and unstable trauma patients by the intubating specialties. RESULTS: A total of 102 participants were included; 47 were anaesthetists and 55 were emergency physicians. Propofol (74.5%) and Etomidate (50.0%) were the most frequently used induction agents. Significantly higher proportion of anesthesiologist used Propofol whereas, Etomidate was commonly used by emergency physicians in stable patients (P=0.001). Emergency physicians preferred Etomidate (63.6%) and Ketamine (20.0%) in unstable patients. The two groups were comparable for opioid use for stable patients. In unstable patients, use of opioid differed significantly by intubating specialties. The relation between rocuronium and suxamethonium use did change among the anaesthetists. Emergency physicians used more suxamethonium (55.6% vs. 27.7%, P=0.01) in stable as well as unstable (43.4 % vs. 27.7%, P=0.08) patients. CONCLUSION There is variability in the use of drugs for RSI in trauma patients amongst emergency physicians and anaesthesiologists. There is a need to develop an RSI protocol using standardized types and dose of these agents to deliver an effective airway management for trauma patients.