Pain during endotracheal aspiration (ETA) is frequent in critically ill patients. Managing pre-emptive analgesia before procedures remains a crucial aspect of care. We compared pupillometry to standard clinical practice for assessing preemptive-analgesia administration and pain before ETA according to Behavioural Pain Scale (BPS), the Behavioural Pain Indicator Scale (ESCID), and the Pupillary Dilation Reflex (PDR).

A multicentre parallel-group, controlled trial with balanced (1:1) randomization.

Sedated, mechanically ventilated patients aged ≥ 18 with baseline BPS = 3, ESCID = 1, and RASS scores between -1 and -4 were included.

preemptive-analgesia was administered according to nurse criteria. In the experimental group, preemptive analgesia was administered in patients with PDR ≥ 11.5 % after a 20 mA stimulus measured using AlgiScan®. The preemptive analgesia was fentanyl one µg/kg iv bolus. We used the Chi-square statistic to compare post-intervention pain according to BPS, ESCID, and PDR pain values. A multivariate logistic regression study adjusting for sex, BIS, RASS, APACHE II, remifentanil, and preemptive analgesia was conducted.

Ninety-two patients were studied, 51 in control groups and 41 in intervention groups. Pain incidence was lower in the experimental group. Significantly, 43.9 % of patients in the experimental group were prescribed preemptive analgesia before ETA compared to 19.6 % in the control group (p = 0.03). Multivariate analysis showed significant reductions in pain in the group that received preemptive-analgesia before ETA guided by pupillometry across BPS [OR = 0.34 (95 % CI: 0.12-0.99), p = 0.048], ESCID [OR = 0.29 (95 % CI: 0.09-0.88), p = 0.030] and PDR [OR = 0.27 (95 % IC: 0.08-0.86), p = 0.027] compared to standard clinical practice.

Preemptive analgesia monitored with pupillometry group had a lower percentage of patients with pain than those who received analgesia based on standard clinical practice. This effect was independent of the sex, patient severity, BIS score, remifentanil use, or preemptive- analgesia.

The requirement for preemptive analgesia before aspiration, evaluated through routine clinical practice, was lower than detected by pupillometric monitoring of patients. The use of pupillometry to monitor preemptive analgesia reduced pain after secretion aspiration. Pupillometry would be an effective tool to individualize the need for preemptive analgesia before potentially painful interventions, applicable to all patients regardless of sex, severity, or sedation level.

Monitoring of pain and nociception in critical care patients unable to self-report pain remains challenging. Technical nociception monitors could provide valuable support. Here, we investigated the Nociception Level Index (NOL) and the PainSensor for their ability to predict and detect behavioral responsiveness to two potentially painful clinical interventions.

We included 196 critical care patients undergoing endotracheal suctioning (n = 149) and positioning (n = 47). Clinical responsiveness was graded using the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS). As potential predictors of responsiveness, we recorded data from the NOL and PainSensor along with a variety of nociception-unspecific confounders, including the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS). We assessed their ability to predict behavioral responsiveness using prediction probability.

Both nociception monitors predicted behavioral responsiveness to endotracheal suctioning (NOL 0.67 [0.61-0.74, 95 % confidence interval], PainSensor 0.57 [0.51-0.63]), but neither outperformed the RASS (0.73 [0.68-0.77]). Behavioral responsiveness to positioning was predicted by the NOL (0.80 [0.66-0.94]) but not the PainSensor (0.54 [0.40-0.67]). Again, neither outperformed the RASS (0.68 [0.56-0.80]).

Both nociception monitors can predict behavioral responsiveness to nociceptive clinical stimulation. However, the added value of nociception monitors for detecting pain and nociception in critical care patients remains questionable, as readily available non-technical observational scales show a comparable performance.

Background: Little is known about the end-of-life (EOL) experience in older adults with stroke or how similar the EOL experience is in older adults with stroke when compared to those with cancer. Purpose: We utilized data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) to compare symptoms, symptom management, and overall rating of care in the last month of life between older adults diagnosed with stroke and those diagnosed with cancer. Methods: Logistic regression was used to examine the associations between diagnosis and symptom prevalence, symptom management, and overall care quality, adjusting for care intensity, place of death, and demographic covariates. Results: A total of 747 NHATS participants diagnosed with stroke or cancer were identified. Diagnosis of stroke was associated with whether the symptoms of pain (OR .46, 95% CI .26-.83), dyspnea (OR .32, 95% CI .17-.64), and emotional distress were documented (OR .57, 95% CI .33-.98). Diagnosis was not associated with pain management (OR .85, 95% CI .48-1.48), dyspnea management (OR .97, 95% CI .47-2.03), or emotional distress management (OR 1.02, 95% CI .53-1.97). Correlates of overall care quality included place of death and diagnosis, with patients with stroke more likely to report poorer care quality (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.03-3.04) as well as those who died in the hospital (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.26-3.77). Conclusions: Older adults with stroke are at risk for inadequate symptom assessment and documentation, as well as poorer symptom management and poorer overall care quality.

The physiological state of critically ill patients is severely impaired by illness or trauma and is uncomfortable. Such experiences cause long-term anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder.

This study aimed to understand discomfort and comfort based on the experiences of critically ill adult patients in the intensive care unit and to explore ways to improve their comfort.

This qualitative descriptive study was conducted with 15 critically ill patients (age range: 46-81 years; six females) in the intensive care unit using semistructured interviews and participant observation. The data collected were analysed using Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis. Data were collected from the intensive care unit and general ward of a university hospital in Japan.

Six themes related to discomfort and comfort were identified. The three themes related to discomfort were "overlapping uncertainties", "being unable to control physical discomfort", and "having to endure psychologically and situationally". The three themes related to comfort were "feeling connected brings calm", "routine care relieves pain and thirst", and "ease when one can decide for oneself". Participants' discomfort involved physical and psychological factors and was related to treatments, procedures, care, and the environment. Moreover, more than half of the patients endured unmet needs. Comfort was brought about by providing routine care for physical discomforts that critically ill patients often experience, feeling alive and connected to others and encouraging independence.

Recognising the potential for physical and psychological discomfort, as well as communication and other difficulties, in critically ill patients is crucial. Patients may also experience discomfort when healthcare providers take the lead, which underscores the importance of involving patients in their care. By showing respect for patients' intentions and involving them in decision-making, healthcare providers can improve patient comfort and promote a more collaborative approach to care.

In the intensive care unit (ICU), many patients are unable to communicate their pain through self-reporting or behaviors due to their critical care condition, mechanical ventilation, and medication (eg, heavily sedated or chemically paralyzed). Therefore, alternative pain assessment methods are urgently needed for this vulnerable patient population. The Nociception Level (NOL) index is a multiparameter technology initially developed for the monitoring of nociception and related pain in anesthetized patients, and its use in the ICU is new.

This study aims to validate the NOL for the assessment of nociception and related pain in critically ill adults in the ICU. Specific objectives are to examine the ability of the NOL to: (1) detect pain using standard criteria (ie, self-report and behavioral measures), (2) discriminate between nociceptive and nonnociceptive procedures, and (3) generate consistent values when patients are at rest.

The NOL will be monitored in three ICU patient groups: (1) Group A, participants able to self-report their pain (the reference standard criterion using the 0-10 Faces Pain Thermometer) and express behaviors; (2) Group B, participants unable to self-report but able to express behaviors (the alternative standard criterion using the Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool); and (3) Group C, participants unable to self-report and express behaviors. The NOL will be tested before, during, and after two types of standard care procedures: (1) nonnociceptive (eg, cuff inflation to measure blood pressure, soft touch) and (2) nociceptive (eg, tube or drain removal, endotracheal or tracheal suctioning). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of the NOL will be performed for Groups A and B using pain standard measures as reference criteria. Mixed linear models for repeated measures will be used to compare time points, procedures, and their interaction in each group (A, B, and C). Based on power analyses and considering an attrition rate of 25%, a total sample size of 146 patients (68 in Group A, 62 in Group B, and 16 in Group C) is targeted.

This study was funded in April 2020 but could not be launched until 2022 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Recruitment and data collection began at the primary site in July 2022 and has been implemented at the secondary sites in 2023 and 2024 and is planned to continue until 2026.

The primary strength of this study protocol is that it is based on rigorous validation strategies with the use of pain standard criteria (ie, self-report and behavioral measures). If found to be valid, the NOL could be used as an alternative physiologic measure of pain in critically ill adults for whom no other pain assessment methods are available.

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05339737; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05339737.

DERR1-10.2196/60672.

Agitation is a common psychomotor disorder among critically ill patients on mechanical ventilators, posing significant risks to patients and adding strain to clinical services. Despite its importance, there is a lack of data on the incidence and contributing factors of agitation in the study area and across Ethiopia. This study, therefore, aims to assess the incidence and factors associated with agitation in patients on mechanical ventilators in the intensive care units of comprehensive specialized hospitals in the Amhara Region, North-West Ethiopia. A multi-center prospective follow-up study was conducted among 253 critically ill adult patients on mechanical ventilators in the Amhara region of Ethiopia from April 17, 2024, to July 16, 2024. Data were collected using a semi-structured questionnaire through chart reviews, observations, and interviews. Participants were selected using a consecutive sampling technique. The data were entered into Epi-Data version 4.6 and transferred to Stata version 17 for analysis. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with agitation. Variables with a p value of less than 0.2 in the bivariable analysis were included in the multivariable analysis. Crude and adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were used to identify factors associated with agitation. The results were presented in the form of text, tables, and figures. In the multivariable analysis, variables with a p value of less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant predictors. The overall incidence of agitation among patients on mechanical ventilators in intensive care units was 87.35% (95% CI 82.6, 91.2). Anxiety (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 3.5; 95% CI 1.28, 9.45), delirium (AOR 3.01; 95% CI 1.13, 7.97), pain (AOR 3.23; 95% CI 1.18, 8.85), hyperthermia (AOR 3.49; 95% CI 1.004, 12.15), hyponatremia (AOR 3.64; 95% CI 1.009, 13.11), and the use of restraints (AOR 3.49; 95% CI 1.11, 8.67) were statistically significant factors associated with agitation. In this study, the majority of participants experienced agitation. To reduce the incidence of agitation, we recommend addressing or preventing the development of anxiety, pain, delirium, hyperthermia, and hyponatremia, as well as minimizing the use of restraints in intensive care units.

This study introduces a multimodal sentiment analysis system to assess and recognize human pain sentiments within an Internet of Things (IoT)-enabled healthcare framework. This system integrates facial expressions and speech-audio recordings to evaluate human pain intensity levels. This integration aims to enhance the recognition system's performance and enable a more accurate assessment of pain intensity. Such a multimodal approach supports improved decision making in real-time patient care, addressing limitations inherent in unimodal systems for measuring pain sentiment. So, the primary contribution of this work lies in developing a multimodal pain sentiment analysis system that integrates the outcomes of image-based and audio-based pain sentiment analysis models. The system implementation contains five key phases. The first phase focuses on detecting the facial region from a video sequence, a crucial step for extracting facial patterns indicative of pain. In the second phase, the system extracts discriminant and divergent features from the facial region using deep learning techniques, utilizing some convolutional neural network (CNN) architectures, which are further refined through transfer learning and fine-tuning of parameters, alongside fusion techniques aimed at optimizing the model's performance. The third phase performs the speech-audio recording preprocessing; the extraction of significant features is then performed through conventional methods followed by using the deep learning model to generate divergent features to recognize audio-based pain sentiments in the fourth phase. The final phase combines the outcomes from both image-based and audio-based pain sentiment analysis systems, improving the overall performance of the multimodal system. This fusion enables the system to accurately predict pain levels, including 'high pain', 'mild pain', and 'no pain'. The performance of the proposed system is tested with the three image-based databases such as a 2D Face Set Database with Pain Expression, the UNBC-McMaster database (based on shoulder pain), and the BioVid database (based on heat pain), along with the VIVAE database for the audio-based dataset. Extensive experiments were performed using these datasets. Finally, the proposed system achieved accuracies of 76.23%, 84.27%, and 38.04% for two, three, and five pain classes, respectively, on the 2D Face Set Database with Pain Expression, UNBC, and BioVid datasets. The VIVAE audio-based system recorded a peak performance of 97.56% and 98.32% accuracy for varying training-testing protocols. These performances were compared with some state-of-the-art methods that show the superiority of the proposed system. By combining the outputs of both deep learning frameworks on image and audio datasets, the proposed multimodal pain sentiment analysis system achieves accuracies of 99.31% for the two-class, 99.54% for the three-class, and 87.41% for the five-class pain problems.

To investigate the prevalence and risk factors for long-term pain following an ICU stay.

This prospective, single-center study included patients who stayed in the ICU for ≥3 days and could complete a questionnaire. The primary aim was to assess chronic pain incidence at 3 months and up to 1 year post-discharge and identify associated risk factors. Follow-up involved 3 phone interviews at 3, 6, and 12 months, utilizing the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2).

Among the 150 included patients (mean age 66 ± 17 years; 66 % male; median SAPS II 39), 71(47 %) reported pain at discharge. At 3 months, 39 % of 114 respondents had pain, and 35 % of 103 patients at one year. Significant factors for pain at 3 months included urgent surgical admission (p = 0.029), axial-skeleton bone fractures (p = 0.035), days with significant pain in ICU (p = 0.004), and opioid exposure (p = 0.014 for duration, p = 0.038 for dose). Axial skeleton fractures were independently associated with pain at 1 year (OR 5.18, p = 0.023).

Around one-third of ICU patients experience pain one year post-discharge, with axial-skeleton bone fractures being a significant risk factor for chronic pain.

Management of pain and optimal opioids dose during ICU stay are crucial to limit chronic pain after ICU discharge. Special attention should be given to patients with axial-skeleton fracture.

Intensive care unit (ICU) patients under mechanical ventilation experience mild-to-severe pain. International guidelines emphasise the importance and benefits of multimodal analgesia to minimise opioid consumption and its side effects. However, no recommendation about drugs or protocol has been formulated. The aim of the Opioid-Free Analgesia in Intensive Care Unit study is to assess the feasibility of a standardised multimodal analgesia strategy and its benefits following the impact of remifentanil sparing in ICU patients.

50 mechanically ventilated adult patients will be recruited in a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, feasibility trial. In the interventional group, patients will receive a standardised multimodal analgesia, initially receiving nefopam and tramadol, implementing with ketamine if patients remain painful, and then implementing with remifentanil with escalating doses in case of insufficient analgesia. In the control group, patients will receive remifentanil, implementing doses gradually to achieve analgesia. The primary outcome will be the daily consumption of remifentanil between the 24th and 48th hour after inclusion. Secondary outcomes will include drug tolerance, mechanical ventilation duration, ICU and hospital length of stay, 28-day and 90-day mortalities and 90-day opioid consumption.

The study protocol was accepted by the Nîmes University Hospital's research committee, the French ethics committee (Institutional Review Board OUEST IV) and the French National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products (ANSM).

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05825560.

Pain, delirium, and sedation should be assessed routinely using validated assessment scales. Inappropriately managed pain, delirium, and sedation in critically ill patients can have serious consequences regarding mortality, morbidity, and increased healthcare costs. Despite the benefits of a bundled approach to pain, delirium, and sedation assessments, few studies have explored nurses' perceptions of using validated scales for such assessments. Furthermore, no studies have examined nurses' perceptions of undertaking these assessments as a bundled approach.

The objective of this study was to explore nurses' knowledge, perceptions, attitudes, and experiences regarding the use of validated pain, delirium, and sedation assessment tools as a bundled approach in the intensive care unit (ICU).

A qualitative exploratory descriptive design was adopted. We conducted four focus groups and 10 individual interviews with 23 nurses from a 26-bed adult ICU at an Australian metropolitan tertiary teaching hospital. Data were analysed using thematic analysis techniques.

Four themes were identified: (i) factors impacting nurses' ability to undertake pain, delirium, and sedation assessments in the ICU; (ii) use, misuse, and nonuse of tools and use of alternative strategies to assess pain, delirium, and sedation; (iii) implementing assessment tools; and (iv) consequences of suboptimal pain, delirium, and sedation assessments. A gap was found in nurses' use of validated scales to assess pain, delirium, and sedation as a bundled approach, and they were not familiar with using a bundled approach to assessment.

The practice gap could be addressed using a carefully planned implementation strategy. Strategies could include a policy and protocol for assessing pain, delirium, and sedation in the ICU, engagement of change champions to facilitate uptake of the strategy, reminder and feedback systems, further in-service education, and ongoing workplace training for nurses.

Pain is one of the most detrimental symptoms exhibited by cancer patients, being an indication for opioid therapy in up to half of the patients receiving chemotherapy and even more for those with advanced cancer. This article aims to briefly overview current knowledge on cancer-related pain with a focus on assessment and new approaches and trends. We will also provide some insight on the lower- and middle-income countries context.

A narrative review of the literature was conducted including relevant guidelines and recommendations from scientific societies and WHO.

Data on the approach and assessment of cancer pain as well as current and novel approaches have been displayed with the help of tables and figures.

Since the initial recommendations of the WHO analgesic ladder method, new insights have emerged. Scientific progress reaches its maximum social sense when populations and governments prioritise the value of relief and compassion, and concrete actions are implemented with the aim of relieving cancer pain.

Advances in our approach to treating pain and sedation when caring for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) have been propelled by decades of robust trial data, knowledge gained from patient experiences, and our evolving understanding of how pain and sedation strategies affect patient survival and long term outcomes. These data contribute to current practice guidelines prioritizing analgesia-first sedation strategies (analgosedation) that target light sedation when possible, use of short acting sedatives, and avoidance of benzodiazepines. Together, these strategies allow the patient to be more awake and able to participate in early mobilization and family interactions. The covid-19 pandemic introduced unique challenges in the ICU that affected delivery of best practices and patient outcomes. Compliance with best practices has not returned to pre-covid levels. After emerging from the pandemic and refocusing our attention on optimal pain and sedation management in the ICU, it is imperative to revisit the data that contributed to our current recommendations, review the importance of best practices on patient outcomes, and consider new strategies when advancing patient care.

Recognizing and managing pain is especially challenging for vulnerable populations who cannot communicate their discomfort. Because there is no valid and reliable objective measure of pain, the American Society for Pain Management Nursing advocates for comprehensive assessment practices articulated in a Hierarchy of Pain Assessment. These practices must gather relevant information to infer the presence of pain and evaluate a patient's response to treatment. Nurses and other healthcare providers must be advocates for those who cannot communicate their pain experience.

Neurologically critically ill patients present with unique disease trajectories, prognostic uncertainties, and challenges to end-of-life (EOL) care. Acute brain injuries place these patients at risk for underrecognized symptoms and unmet EOL management needs, which can negatively affect their quality of care and lead to complicated grief in surviving loved ones. To care for patients nearing the EOL in the neurointensive care unit, health care clinicians must consider neuroanatomic localization, barriers to symptom assessment and management, unique aspects of the dying process, and EOL management needs.

We aim to define current best practices, barriers, and future directions for EOL care of the neurologically critically ill patient.

Pain management of sedated and ventilated patients in intensive care units lacks consistency.

To investigate nurses' training, governance, practices, knowledge and attitudes relating to pain management in consideration of published guidelines and explore nurses' perspectives.

A survey design, using an online questionnaire with free text responses, was employed. Quantitative and qualitative data from nurses working across different hospitals were collated and saved on Qualtrics platform. Quantitative data were analysed non-parametrically and narrative responses thematically. CROSS and SRQR reporting guidelines were adhered to.

Demographics, training, governance, clinical practice, knowledge, and attitudes.

108 nurses participated with ninety-two completed surveys analysed. Analgesia was used to complete nursing tasks regardless of comfort needs (n = 49, 53.3 %). Changes in vital signs prompted opioid administration (n = 48, 52.1 %). Choice of analgesia depended on doctor's preference (n = 63, 68.5 %). Non-opioid therapy was administered before opioids (n = 42, 45.7 %). Sedatives were used to alleviate agitation(n = 50,54.3 %). No statistically significant difference in nurses' knowledge existed between hospitals. Weak positive relationship: r = [0.081], p = [0.441] between "knowledge scores" and "years of ICU experience" and weak negative relationship r = [-0.119], p = [0.260] between "knowledge scores" and "hours of clinical practice" was detected. Lack of training, resources, policies, high patient acuity and casual employment were acknowledged barriers to pain management. Two overarching themes emerged from narrative responses: "Pain assessment, where is it?" And "Priorities of critical illness."

The study uncovered pain management situation and examined nurses' demographics, training, governance, practices, knowledge and attitudes. Narrative responses highlighted barriers to pain management.

Health organisations should provide education, institute governance and develop policies to inform pain management. Nurses' role encompasses updating knowledge, adhering to interventions and overcoming biases. This subsequently manifests as improvement in patient outcomes.

Pain is a common complaint among a spectrum of diseases. Although an ideal objective method of pain assessment is lacking, several validated tools are available for use in clinical research and practice. The tool considerations are based upon the parameters to be assessed and factors specific to patient, disease, and availability of instruments. This review classifies and brings the key aspects of currently available pain assessment tools on a single platform to ease the selection process for researchers/practitioners. The tools utilized for pain assessment were collected from articles available in PubMed and Google Scholar databases and classified into the following domains: unidimensional, multi-dimensional, investigation-based, and computerized algorithm-based tools. Their purpose of use and limitations are reviewed. The unidimensional scales are used to describe only the characteristics of pain, like intensity (e.g. numerical rating scale), type (e.g. neuropathic pain questionnaire), or pattern. In contrast, multi-dimensional tools, like Mc Gill Questionnaire, assess not only pain as an individual symptom but also its influence on physical functioning and general well-being. However, certain components like ethnicity, age, cognitive impairment, sedation, and emotion become a limiting factor in selecting the scale. In addition to these scales, a potential role of parameters such as biopotentials/markers has also been shown in pain assessment. Last, artificial intelligence is also being applied in evaluation of pain. Pain measurement is subjective in nature as assessed through questionnaires and observational tools. Currently, multi-dimensional approaches of pain assessment are available, which can lead to precision pain management.

Pain is routinely measured on mechanically ventilated ICU patients. However, the tools used are not designed to discriminate between pain and non-pain discomfort, a distinction with therapeutic implications.

To evaluate whether clinical measurement tools can discern both pain and non-pain discomfort.

A prospective observational cohort study was conducted in a General ICU at a tertiary Medical Center in Israel. The Behavior Pain Scale (BPS) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of Discomfort were simultaneously assessed by a researcher and bedside nurse on thirteen lightly sedated patients during 71 routine nursing interventions in lightly sedated, mechanically ventilated, adult patients. Patients were asked whether they were in pain due to these interventions.

Statistically significant increases from baseline during interventions were observed [median change: 1.00 (-1-5), 1.5(-4-8.5), p < 0.001] as measured by BPS and VAS Discomfort Scale, respectively. BPS scores ranged between 4 and 6 when the majority (53 %) of the patients replied that they had no pain but were interpreted by the clinicians as discomfort. Endotracheal suctioning caused the greatest increase in BPS and VAS, with no statistically significant differences in BPS and VAS Discomfort Scale scores whether patients reported or did not report pain. A BPS>6 had a higher sensitivity and specificity to reported pain (accuracy of 76 %) compared to a BPS of 4-6.

Standard assessments are sensitive to pain caused by routine nursing care interventions. However, this study presents evidence that among lightly sedated ICU patients, moderate BPS scores could also measure non-pain discomfort. ICU nurses should be aware that signs of unpleasantness measured by a pain scale could reflect non-pain discomfort.

Pain management is an essential and complex issue for non-communicative patients undergoing sedation in the intensive care unit (ICU). The Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS), although not perfect for assessing behavioral pain, is the gold standard based partly on clinical facial expression. NEVVA© , an automatic pain assessment tool based on facial expressions in critically ill patients, is a much-needed innovative medical device.

In this prospective pilot study, we recorded the facial expressions of critically ill patients in the medical ICU of Caen University Hospital using the iPhone and Smart Motion Tracking System (SMTS) software with the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) to measure human facial expressions metrically during sedation weaning. Analyses were recorded continuously, and BPS scores were collected hourly over two 8 h periods per day for 3 consecutive days. For this first stage, calibration of the innovative NEVVA© medical device algorithm was obtained by comparison with the reference pain scale (BPS).

Thirty participants were enrolled between March and July 2022. To assess the acute severity of illness, the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) were recorded on ICU admission and were 9 and 47, respectively. All participants had deep sedation, assessed by a Richmond Agitation and Sedation scale (RASS) score of less than or equal to -4 at the time of inclusion. One thousand and six BPS recordings were obtained, and 130 recordings were retained for final calibration: 108 BPS recordings corresponding to the absence of pain and 22 BPS recordings corresponding to the presence of pain. Due to the small size of the dataset, a leave-one-subject-out cross-validation (LOSO-CV) strategy was performed, and the training results obtained the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.792. This model has a sensitivity of 81.8% and a specificity of 72.2%.

This pilot study calibrated the NEVVA© medical device and showed the feasibility of continuous facial expression analysis for pain monitoring in ICU patients. The next step will be to correlate this device with the BPS scale.

Pain in critically ill adults with burns should be assessed using structured pain behavioural observation measures. This study tested the clinimetric qualities and usability of the behaviour pain scale (BPS) and the critical-care pain observation tool (CPOT) in this population. This prospective observational cohort study included 132 nurses who rated pain behaviour in 75 patients. The majority of nurses indicated that BPS and CPOT reflect background and procedural pain-specific features (63-72 and 87-80%, respectively). All BPS and CPOT items loaded on one latent variable (≥0.70), except for compliance ventilator and vocalisation for CPOT (0.69 and 0.64, respectively). Internal consistency also met the criterion of ≥0.70 in ventilated and non-ventilated patients for both scales, except for non-ventilated patients observed by BPS (0.67). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of total scores were sufficient (≥0.70), but decreased when patients had facial burns. In general, the scales were fast to administer and easy to understand. Cut-off scores for BPS and CPOT were 4 and 1, respectively. In conclusion, both scales seem valid, reliable, and useful for the measurement of acute pain in ICU patients with burns, including patients with facial burns. Cut-off scores associated with BPS and CPOT for the burn population allow professionals to connect total scores to person-centred treatment protocols.

Critically ill patients are exposed to several physical and emotional stressors, needing analgesic and sedative drugs to tolerate invasive procedures and the harsh intensive care unit (ICU) environment. However, this pharmacological therapy presents several side effects: guidelines suggest using a light sedation target, keeping critically ill patients calm, conscious, and cooperative. Personalized music therapy (MT) can reduce stress and anxiety, decreasing the need for drugs. The aim of the current investigation is to compare different approaches for MT in the ICU: a personalized approach, with music selected by patients/families and listened through headphones, or a generalized approach, with ambient music chosen by a music therapist and transmitted through speakers.

number of days "free from neuroactive drugs" in the first 28 days after ICU admission.

total amount of neuroactive drugs (midazolam, propofol, morphine, fentanyl, haloperidol), stress during ICU stay (sleep at night, anxiety and agitation, use of physical restraints, stressors evaluated at discharge), the feasibility of generalized MT (interruptions requested by staff members and patients/families).

Randomized, controlled trial with three groups of critically ill adults: a control group, without MT; a personalized MT group, with music for at least 2 h per day; a generalized MT group, with music for 12.5 h/day, subdivided into fifteen 50-min periods.

One hundred fifty-three patients are expected to be enrolled. This publication presents the rationale and the study methods, particularly the strategies used to build the generalized MT playlist. From a preliminary analysis, generalized MT seems feasible in the ICU and is positively received by staff members, critically ill patients, and families.

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03280329. September 12, 2017.

Despite the existence of evidence-based guidelines for the assessment and management of pain in the critical care setting, the prevalence of acute pain remains high. Inadequate pain management is associated with longer duration of mechanical ventilation, reduced capacity for rehabilitation and long-term psychological sequelae. This study aimed to describe the experiences of pain management from healthcare professionals working in intensive care units. Healthcare professionals were recruited from intensive care units in London, UK using a purposive sampling technique. Semi-structured interviews were transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis technique. Thirty participants were recruited from eight diverse intensive care units. Five themes were identified. First, there was a lack of consensus in pain assessment in the ICU where nursing staff described more knowledge and confidence of validated pain measures than physicians, and concerns over validity and usability were raised. Second, there was a universal perception of resource availability impacting the quality of pain management including high clinical workload, staff turnover and availability of certain pain management techniques. Third, acknowledgement of the importance of pain management was highest in those with experience of interacting with critical care survivors. Fourth, participants described their own emotional reaction to managing those in pain which influenced their learning. Finally, there was a perception that, due to the complexity of the intensive care unit population, pain was de-prioritised and there were conflicting views as to whether standardised analgosedation algorithms were useful. This study provides evidence to suggest interdisciplinary training, collaboratively designed decision-making tools, prioritisation initiatives and research priorities are areas that could be targeted to improve pain management in critical care.

The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of a structured educational intervention on the implementation of guideline-recommended pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD) assessment.

This was a prospective, multinational, interventional before-after trial conducted at 12 intensive care units from 10 centers in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and the UK. Intensive care units underwent a 6-week structured educational program, comprising online lectures, instructional videos, educational handouts, and bedside teaching. Patient-level PAD assessment data were collected in three 1-day point-prevalence assessments before (T1), 6 weeks after (T2), and 1 year after (T3) the educational program.

A total of 430 patients were included. The rate of patients who received all three PAD assessments changed from 55% (107/195) at T1 to 53% (68/129) at T2, but increased to 73% (77/106) at T3 (p = 0.003). The delirium screening rate increased from 64% (124/195) at T1 to 65% (84/129) at T2 and 77% (82/106) at T3 (p = 0.041). The pain assessment rate increased from 87% (170/195) at T1 to 92% (119/129) at T2 and 98% (104/106) at T3 (p = 0.005). The rate of sedation assessment showed no signficiant change. The proportion of patients who received nonpharmacological delirium prevention measures increased from 58% (114/195) at T1 to 80% (103/129) at T2 and 91% (96/106) at T3 (p < 0.001). Multivariable regression revealed that at T3, patients were more likely to receive a delirium assessment (odds ratio [OR] 2.138, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.206-3.790; p = 0.009), sedation assessment (OR 4.131, 95% CI 1.372-12.438; p = 0.012), or all three PAD assessments (OR 2.295, 95% CI 1.349-3.903; p = 0.002) compared with T1.

In routine care, many patients were not assessed for PAD. Assessment rates increased significantly 1 year after the intervention. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03553719.

Central to palliative care is the early assessment and treatment of pain, whether physical, psychosocial, or spiritual. Nonverbal palliative care patients are at risk for inadequate pain assessment leading to prolonged suffering.

The purpose of this project was to implement and evaluate an evidence-based pain assessment tool for nonverbal palliative care patients.

The Iowa Model Revised: Evidence-Based Practice to Promote Excellence in Healthcare and the Implementation Strategies for Evidence-Based Practice Guide provided the guiding frameworks.

On a six-bed adult inpatient Palliative Care Unit (PCU).

Nonverbal palliative care patients.

Evidence supported use of the Multidimensional Objective Pain Assessment Tool (MOPAT) for nonverbal patients receiving palliative care. During an eight-week pilot, nurses recorded pain assessments on a paper form and trended pain scores over a 24-hour period. Evaluation included knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors pre- and post-pilot and was subsequently used in a Precision Implementation Approach to promote adoption.

Nurses' attitudes toward palliative care pain assessment improved in all items on the evaluation tools. Pain was assessed using MOPAT for 74% of nonverbal palliative care patients and 88% of patients had linked pain interventions to MOPAT scores.

MOPAT is the only valid evidence-based pain assessment tool for nonverbal patients receiving palliative care. This project led to successful adoption of the MOPAT within the PCU.

The Working Group on Ethics in Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine of the Austrian Society for Anesthesiology Resuscitation and Intensive Care Medicine (ÖGARI) already developed documentation tools for the adaption of therapeutic goals 10 years ago. Since then the practical implementation of Comfort Terminal Care in the daily routine in particular has raised numerous questions, which are discussed in this follow-up paper and answered in an evidence-based manner whenever possible.

The practical implementation of pain therapy and reduction of anxiety, stress and respiratory distress that are indicated in the context of Comfort Terminal Care are described in more detail. The measures that are not (or no longer) indicated, such as oxygen administration and ventilation as well as the administration of fluids and nutrition, are also commented on. Furthermore, recommendations are given regarding monitoring, (laboratory) findings and drug treatment and the importance of nursing actions in the context of Comfort Terminal Care is mentioned. Finally, the support for the next of kin and the procedure in the time after death are presented.

A change in treatment goals with a timely switch to Comfort Terminal Care enables good and humane care for seriously ill patients and their relatives at the end of life and the appreciation of their previous life with the possibility of positive experiences until the end.

The evaluation of pain in patients, unable of oral communication, often relies on behavioral assessment. However, some critically ill patients, while non-verbal, are awake and have some potential for self-reporting. The objective was to compare the results of a behavioral pain assessment with self-reporting in awake, non-verbal, critically ill patients unable to use low-tech augmentative and alternative communication tools.

Prospective cohort study of intubated or tracheotomized adult, ventilated patients with a RASS (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale) of -1 to + 1 and inadequate non-verbal communication skills in a surgical intensive care unit of a tertiary care university hospital. For pain assessment, the Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS) was used. Self-reporting of pain was achieved by using an eye tracking device to evaluate the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and the pain/discomfort item of the EuroQol EQ-5D-5 L (EQ-Pain). All measurements were taken at rest.

Data was collected from 75 patients. Neither the NRS nor the EQ-Pain (r < .15) correlated with the BPS. However, NRS and EQ-Pain were significantly correlated (r = .78, p = < 0.001), indicating the reliability of the self-reporting by these patients. Neither the duration of intubation/tracheostomy, nor cause for ICU treatment, nor BPS subcategories had an influence on these results.

Behavioral pain assessment tools in non-verbal patients who are awake and not in delirium appear unreliable in estimating pain during rest. Before a behavioral assessment tool such as the BPS is used, the application of high-tech AACs should be strongly considered.

German Clinical Trials Register, Registration number: DRKS00021233. Registered 23 April 2020 - Retrospectively registered, https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00021233 .

Beta-blocker (BB) therapy plays a central role in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases. An increasing number of patients with cardiovascular diseases undergoe noncardiac surgery, where opioids are an integral part of the anesthesiological management. There is evidence to suggest that short-term intravenous BB therapy may influence perioperative opioid requirements due to an assumed cross-talk between G-protein coupled beta-adrenergic and opioid receptors. Whether chronic BB therapy could also have an influence on perioperative opioid requirements is unclear.

A post hoc analysis of prospectively collected data from a multicenter observational (BioCog) study was performed. Inclusion criteria consisted of elderly patients (≥ 65 years) undergoing elective noncardiac surgery as well as total intravenous general anesthesia without the use of regional anesthesia and duration of anesthesia ≥ 60 min. Two groups were defined: patients with and without BB in their regular preopreative medication. The administered opioids were converted to their respective morphine equivalent doses. Multiple regression analysis was performed using the morphine-index to identify independent predictors.

A total of 747 patients were included in the BioCog study in the study center Berlin. 106 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of these, 37 were on chronic BB. The latter were preoperatively significantly more likely to have arterial hypertension (94.6%), chronic renal failure (27%) and hyperlipoproteinemia (51.4%) compared to patients without BB. Both groups did not differ in terms of cumulative perioperative morphine equivalent dose (230.9 (BB group) vs. 214.8 mg (Non-BB group)). Predictive factors for increased morphine-index were older age, male sex, longer duration of anesthesia and surgery of the trunk. In a model with logarithmised morphine index, only gender (female) and duration of anesthesia remained predictive factors.

Chronic BB therapy was not associated with a reduced perioperative opioid consumption.

This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02265263 ) on the 15.10.2014 with the principal investigator being Univ.-Prof. Dr. med. Claudia Spies.

Effective postoperative pain management is necessary to improve the outcomes of older adults undergoing total knee replacement (TKR). Discovering what registered nurses (RNs) need to know about pain management may be beneficial to improving the quality of care.

The study aimed to identify the information needed to develop pain management education for RNs caring for older adults undergoing TKR.

A qualitative descriptive design was used in this study. Three focus groups were conducted with 22 staff RNs with experience caring for older adults undergoing TKR at a supra-tertiary care hospital in Bangkok, Thailand; one focus group was conducted with five members of the hospital's nursing pain management committee. Data were analyzed using content analysis.

Two themes relevant to pain assessment education were pain assessment and pain management. Subthemes of pain assessment included challenges in cognitively impaired older adults, inadequate knowledge and misconceptions, and re-assessing pain. Three subthemes of pain management were created, including knowledge of pain medication, new trends in pharmacological pain management and devices, and non-pharmacological pain management using cold compression.

RNs require current information about pain management to provide effective postoperative care for older adults undergoing TKR. The findings may be used in pain management education to update RNs' knowledge of pain management.

This study aimed to examine the interrater agreement of Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool-Neuro (CPOT-Neuro) scores as a newly developed tool for pain assessment in patients with critical illness and brain injury between raters using two methods of rating (bedside versus video) during standard care procedures (i.e., non-invasive blood pressure and turning). The bedside raters were research staff, and the two video raters had different backgrounds (health and non-health disciplines). Raters received standardized 45 min training by the principal investigator. Video recordings of 56 patient participants with a brain injury at different levels of consciousness were included. Interrater agreement was supported with an Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) > 0.65 for all pairs of raters and for each procedure. Interrater agreement was highest during turning in the conscious group, with ICCs ranging from 0.79 to 0.90. The use of video recordings was challenging for the observation of some behaviors (i.e., tearing, face flushing), which were influenced by factors such as lighting and the angle of the camera. Ventilator alarms were also challenging to distinguish from other sources for the video rater from a non-health discipline. Following standardized training, video technology was useful in achieving an acceptable interrater agreement of CPOT-Neuro scores between bedside and video raters for research purposes.

Critically ill patients experience various stressful symptoms of discomfort, including dyspnea, pain, and sleep disruption. Notably, ventilated patients have difficulty self-reporting discomfort symptoms. Nurses need to assess discomfort symptoms to alleviate them, but limited research exists on discomfort symptom assessment and management in critically ill patients.

To identify the practices, attitudes, and barriers among nurses related to the assessment of discomfort symptoms in mechanically ventilated patients.

Using a cross-sectional, descriptive study design, a web-based survey was conducted between May and June 2022 with critical care nurses sampled through Japanese academic societies and social networking services. The survey contained questions relative to the above-stated objective. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed without sample size calculation because of the descriptive and exploratory nature of this study.

There were 267 respondents to the questionnaire. The discomfort symptoms that nurses perceived as important to assess were pain (median 100 [interquartile range, IQR 90-100]), insomnia (99 [80-100]), and dyspnea (96.5 [75-100]). Most participants (89.8%) routinely assessed pain in mechanically ventilated patients using a scale; however, other discomfort symptoms were assessed by less than 40% (dyspnea [28.4%], fatigue [8.1%], thirst [13.1%], insomnia [37.3%], and anxiety [13.6%]). Two major barriers to assessing discomfort symptoms were lack of assessment culture within the intensive care unit and lack of knowledge of the relevant evaluation scales.

Nurses were aware of the importance of using scales to assess the discomfort symptoms experienced by mechanically ventilated patients. However, except for pain, most nurses did not routinely use scales to assess discomfort symptoms. Barriers to routine discomfort symptom assessment included the lack of an assessment culture and the lack of knowledge of the assessment scales. Clinicians should be educated regarding the existence of validated rating scales and develop additional rating scales utilizable for minor discomforts in mechanically ventilated patients.

We retrospectively evaluated the postoperative efficacy of an orexin receptor antagonist for patients who underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB).

We invested 108 patients who underwent cardiovascular surgery at our hospital. Patients were categorized as those received orexin receptor antagonist after surgery (S group, n = 64) or without orexin receptor antagonist (N group, n = 44), and the following data were analyzed between both groups.

The incidence of postoperative delirium (POD) was significantly less in the S group than in the N group (N vs. S = 36.4 vs. 6.3%, p <0.001). Postoperative new atrial fibrillation (POAF) was significantly less in the S group compared with the N group (N vs. S = 36.4% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.003). Intensive care unit stay (N vs. S = 5.0 ± 1.5 vs. 3.8 ± 0.9 days, p <0.001) and hospitalization (N vs. S = 20.5 ± 9.2 vs. 17.1 ± 7.2 days, p = 0.037) were significantly shorter in the S group compared with the N group.

Orexin receptor antagonists might reduce POD and POAF, and this effect could introduce the shortness of intensive care unit stay and hospitalization. Orexin receptor antagonist could be useful for patients who undergo OPCAB.

The objective of this study was to compare pain control and opioid consumption in critically ill patients who were treated with buprenorphine sublingual or oxycodone oral/enteral during ICU admission.

This was a retrospective, parallel, cohort study.

General medical or surgical ICUs of a quaternary, urban hospital in Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Data were obtained for all patients admitted to two general medical or surgical ICU from January 2019 to January 2023. Patients were grouped as those who received buprenorphine sublingual versus oxycodone oral/enteral.

None.

Pain control was compared between a propensity score matched cohort of patients who received buprenorphine versus oxycodone. The primary outcome was the probability of significant pain. A significant pain score was defined as greater than or equal to 4 on the 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale or greater than or equal to 6 on the Behavioral Pain Scale. The study cohort included 1,070 patients (288 buprenorphine and 782 oxycodone). After propensity score matching, there were 288 patients in each group. The mean age of the matched cohort was 64 ± 16 years, 295 (51%) were male, and 359 (62%) had a surgical admission. The median probability of significant pain was 0.16 with buprenorphine and 0.17 with oxycodone (median difference, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.04; p = 0.50). Median opioid consumption in oral morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) was 65 with buprenorphine and 70 with oxycodone (median difference, -1 mg; 95% CI, -10 to 10 mg; p = 0.73). Median MME per ICU day was 22 with buprenorphine and 22 with oxycodone (median difference, 1 mg; 95% CI, -2 to 5 mg; p = 0.38).

Buprenorphine sublingual is as effective as oxycodone oral/enteral with regard to pain control and opioid consumption in the ICU. Buprenorphine sublingual is an appropriate option for patients in the ICU who are unable to take oral/enteral medications.

This study aimed to examine the association between ABCDEF bundles and long-term postintensive care syndrome (PICS)-related outcomes.

Secondary analysis of the J-PICS study.

This study was simultaneously conducted in 14 centers and 16 ICUs in Japan between April 1, 2019, and September 30, 2019.

Adult ICU patients who were expected to be on a ventilator for at least 48 hours.

None.

Bundle compliance for the last 24 hours was recorded using a checklist at 8:00 am The bundle compliance rate was defined as the 3-day average of the number of bundles performed each day divided by the total number of bundles. The relationship between the bundle compliance rate and PICS prevalence (defined by the 36-item Short Form Physical Component Scale, Mental Component Scale, and Short Memory Questionnaire) was examined. A total of 191 patients were included in this study. Of these, 33 patients (17.3%) died in-hospital and 48 (25.1%) died within 6 months. Of the 96 patients with 6-month outcome data, 61 patients (63.5%) had PICS and 35 (36.5%) were non-PICS. The total bundle compliance rate was 69.8%; the rate was significantly lower in the 6-month mortality group (66.6% vs 71.6%, p = 0.031). Bundle compliance rates in patients with and without PICS were 71.3% and 69.9%, respectively ( p = 0.61). After adjusting for confounding variables, bundle compliance rates were not significantly different in the context of PICS prevalence ( p = 0.56). A strong negative correlation between the bundle compliance rate and PICS prevalence ( r = -0.84, R 2 = 0.71, p = 0.035) was observed in high-volume centers.

The bundle compliance rate was not associated with PICS prevalence. However, 6-month mortality was lower with a higher bundle compliance rate. A trend toward a lower PICS prevalence was associated with higher bundle compliance in high-volume centers.

The aims of this study were to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of continuous intravenous administration of remifentanil in mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit (ICU).

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, fentanyl-controlled, non-inferiority phase 3 study. Patients aged ≥ 20 years requiring 6 h to 10 days mechanical ventilation in an ICU and requiring pain relief were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either remifentanil (n = 98) or fentanyl (n = 98). Dose was titrated from an infusion rate of 1 mL/h (remifentanil: 0.025 µg/kg/min, fentanyl: 0.1 µg/kg/h) until the target level of analgesia (behavioral pain scale [BPS] ≤ 5 or numerical rating score [NRS] ≤ 3) was achieved by escalating the dose in 1 mL/h increasing. Administration was then adjusted to maintain the target level of analgesia until weaning from the ventilator. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who did not require rescue fentanyl. Safety was assessed according to standard procedures. PK of remifentanil in the arterial blood was assessed in 24 patients.

The proportion of patients achieving the primary endpoint in the remifentanil and fentanyl groups was 100% (92/92) and 97.8% (88/90), respectively. The difference between the groups was 2.2% (95% confidence interval, - 0.8-5.3) and non-inferiority of remifentanil to fentanyl was verified (p < 0.0001). The incidences of any adverse events in the remifentanil and fentanyl groups was 34 of 92 patients (37.0%) and 34 of 90 patients (37.8%), respectively. Adverse drug reactions was 12 in 92 patients (13.0%) and 15 in 90 patients (16.7%), respectively. In the PK analysis, blood remifentanil concentration decreased within 10 min to almost 50% of the end of administration, suggesting rapid offset of action following discontinuation of remifentanil.

Remifentanil can be used safely for pain management in mechanically ventilated Japanese patients in the ICU.

Japan Registry of Clinical Trials, jRCT2080224954. Registered 20 November 2019, https://jrct.niph.go.jp/latest-detail/jRCT2080224954 .

To evaluate the association of race with proportion of time in deep sedation among mechanically ventilated adults.

Retrospective cohort study from October 2017 to December 2019.

Five hospitals within a single health system.

Adult patients who identified race as Black or White who were mechanically ventilated for greater than or equal to 24 hours in one of 12 medical, surgical, cardiovascular, cardiothoracic, or mixed ICUs.

None.

The exposure was White compared with Black race. The primary outcome was the proportion of time in deep sedation during the first 48 hours of mechanical ventilation, defined as Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale values of -3 to -5. For the primary analysis, we performed mixed-effects linear regression models including ICU as a random effect, and adjusting for age, sex, English as preferred language, body mass index, Elixhauser comorbidity index, Laboratory-based Acute Physiology Score, Version 2, ICU admission source, admission for a major surgical procedure, and the presence of septic shock. Of the 3337 included patients, 1242 (37%) identified as Black, 1367 (41%) were female, and 1002 (30%) were admitted to a medical ICU. Black patients spent 48% of the first 48 hours of mechanical ventilation in deep sedation, compared with 43% among White patients in unadjusted analysis. After risk adjustment, Black race was significantly associated with more time in early deep sedation (mean difference, 5%; 95% CI, 2-7%; p < 0.01).

There are disparities in sedation during the first 48 hours of mechanical ventilation between Black and White patients across a diverse set of ICUs. Future work is needed to determine the clinical significance of these findings, given the known poorer outcomes for patients who experience early deep sedation.

Machine learning tools have demonstrated viability in visualizing pain accurately using vital sign data; however, it remains uncertain whether incorporating individual patient baselines could enhance accuracy. This study aimed to investigate improving the accuracy by incorporating deviations from baseline patient vital signs and the concurrence of the predicted artificial intelligence values with the probability of critical care pain observation tool (CPOT) ≥ 3 after fentanyl administration. The study included adult patients in intensive care who underwent multiple pain-related assessments. We employed a random forest model, utilizing arterial pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, gender, age, and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score as explanatory variables. Pain was measured as the probability of CPOT scores of ≥ 3, and subsequently adjusted based on each patient's baseline. The study included 10,299 patients with 117,190 CPOT assessments. Of these, 3.3% had CPOT scores of ≥ 3. The random forest model demonstrated strong accuracy with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.903. Patients treated with fentanyl were grouped based on CPOT score improvement. Those with ≥ 1-h of improvement after fentanyl administration had a significantly lower pain index (P = 0.020). Therefore, incorporating deviations from baseline patient vital signs improved the accuracy of pain visualization using machine learning techniques.

Despite advances in the treatment and mitigation of critical illness caused by infection with SARS-CoV-2, millions of survivors have a devastating, post-acute infection syndrome known as long COVID. A large proportion of patients with long COVID have nervous system dysfunction, which is also seen in the distinct but overlapping condition of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), putting survivors of COVID-19-related critical illness at high risk of long-lasting morbidity affecting multiple organ systems and, as a result, engendering measurable deficits in quality of life and productivity. In this Series paper, we discuss neurological, cognitive, and psychiatric sequelae in patients who have survived critical illness due to COVID-19. We review current knowledge of the epidemiology and pathophysiology of persistent neuropsychological impairments, and outline potential preventive strategies based on safe, evidence-based approaches to the management of pain, agitation, delirium, anticoagulation, and ventilator weaning during critical illness. We highlight priorities for current and future research, including possible therapeutic approaches, and offer considerations for health services to address the escalating health burden of long COVID.

Rationale: Breathing difficulties are highly stressful. In critically ill patients, they are associated with an increased risk of posttraumatic manifestations. Dyspnea, the corresponding symptom, cannot be directly assessed in noncommunicative patients. This difficulty can be circumvented using observation scales such as the mechanical ventilation-respiratory distress observation scale (MV-RDOS). Objective: To investigate the performance and responsiveness of the MV-RDOS to infer dyspnea in noncommunicative intubated patients. Methods: Communicative and noncommunicative patients exhibiting breathing difficulties under mechanical ventilation were prospectively included and assessed using a dyspnea visual analog scale, MV-RDOS, EMG activity of alae nasi and parasternal intercostals, and EEG signatures of respiratory-related cortical activation (preinspiratory potentials). Inspiratory-muscle EMG and preinspiratory cortical activities are surrogates of dyspnea. Assessments were conducted at baseline, after adjustment of ventilator settings, and, in some cases, after morphine administration. Measurements and Main Results: Fifty patients (age, 67 [(interquartile interval [IQR]), 61-76] yr; Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, 52 [IQR, 35-62]) were included, 25 of whom were noncommunicative. Relief occurred in 25 (50%) patients after ventilator adjustments and in 21 additional patients after morphine administration. In noncommunicative patients, MV-RDOS score decreased from 5.5 (IQR, 4.2-6.6) at baseline to 4.2 (IQR, 2.1-4.7; P < 0.001) after ventilator adjustments and 2.5 (IQR, 2.1-4.2; P = 0.024) after morphine administration. MV-RDOS and alae nasi/parasternal EMG activities were positively correlated (ρ = 0.41 and 0.37, respectively). MV-RDOS scores were higher in patients with EEG preinspiratory potentials (4.9 [IQR, 4.2-6.3] vs. 4.0 [IQR, 2.1-4.9]; P = 0.002). Conclusions: The MV-RDOS seems able to detect and monitor respiratory symptoms reasonably well in noncommunicative intubated patients. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02801838).

This study aimed to determine the effects of music and active noise cancellation on intraoperative anxiety in patients undergoing lower limb surgeries under spinal anaesthesia.

After obtaining ethical approval, this randomised controlled study was conducted in adult patients (18-50 years of age) of either gender. Patients were randomly allocated to binaural beat music (Group A), noise cancellation (Group B) or no headphones (Group C) group (n = 36 in each group). State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-6 (STAI-6) score and Visual Analogue Score for Satisfaction (VAS-S) were noted preoperatively and at the end of surgery. In addition, Ramsay sedation scores and Likert communication difficulty scores were noted at 30 min intraoperatively. Haemodynamic parameters were noted preoperatively and at different intervals intraoperatively till the end of the surgery.

There was a significant decrease in anxiety scores in Group A, Group B and Group C with postoperative STAI-6 scores (mean ± standard deviation) of 7.8 ± 1.7, 11.7 ± 4.2 and 14.7 ± 5.3, respectively. The difference was significant in Groups A and B compared to Group C (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction scores in Groups A and B were better than in Group C (7.3 ± 1.7 and 6.2 ± 1.6 vs. 5.2 ± 1.3, respectively). Sedation scores and communication difficulty was significantly better in Groups A and B compared to Group C. Systolic blood pressure was significantly better intra- and postoperatively. There were no significant differences in other haemodynamic parameters on most occasions.

Music and noise-cancellation headphones can reduce anxiety and improve satisfaction and sedation scores in patients undergoing spinal anaesthesia.

Inequities in pain assessment are well-documented; however, the psychological mechanisms underlying such biases are poorly understood. We investigated potential perceptual biases in the judgments of faces displaying pain-related movements. Across five online studies, 956 adult participants viewed images of computer-generated faces ("targets") that varied in features related to race (Black and White) and gender (women and men). Target identity was manipulated across participants, and each target had equivalent facial movements that displayed varying intensities of movement in facial action-units related to pain (Studies 1-4) or pain and emotion (Study 5). On each trial, participants provided categorical judgments as to whether a target was in pain (Studies 1-4) or which expression the target displayed (Study 5) and then rated the perceived intensity of the expression. Meta-analyses of Studies 1-4 revealed that movement intensity was positively associated with both categorizing a trial as painful and perceived pain intensity. Target race and gender did not consistently affect pain-related judgments, contrary to well-documented clinical inequities. In Study 5, in which pain was equally likely relative to other emotions, pain was the least frequently selected emotion (5%). Our results suggest that perceivers can utilize facial movements to evaluate pain in other individuals, but perceiving pain may depend on contextual factors. Furthermore, assessments of computer-generated, pain-related facial movements online do not replicate sociocultural biases observed in the clinic. These findings provide a foundation for future studies comparing CGI and real images of pain and emphasize the need for further work on the relationship between pain and emotion.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42761-023-00181-6.

Findings from preclinical studies and one pilot clinical trial suggest potential benefits of epidural analgesia in acute pancreatitis. We aimed to assess the efficacy of thoracic epidural analgesia, in addition to usual care, in improving clinical outcomes of intensive care unit patients with acute pancreatitis.

A multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial including adult patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute pancreatitis upon admission to the intensive care unit. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to a strategy combining thoracic epidural analgesia and usual care (intervention group) or a strategy of usual care alone (control group). The primary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days from randomization until day 30.

Between June 2014 and January 2019, 148 patients were enrolled, and 135 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, with 65 patients randomly assigned to the intervention group and 70 to the control group. The number of ventilator-free days did not differ significantly between the intervention and control groups (median [interquartile range], 30 days [15-30] and 30 days [18-30], respectively; median absolute difference of - 0.0 days, 95% CI - 3.3 to 3.3; p = 0.59). Epidural analgesia was significantly associated with longer duration of invasive ventilation (median [interquartile range], 14 days [5-28] versus 6 days [2-13], p = 0.02).

In a population of intensive care unit adults with acute pancreatitis and low requirement for intubation, this first multicenter randomized trial did not show the hypothesized benefit of epidural analgesia in addition to usual care. Safety of epidural analgesia in this setting requires further investigation.

ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT02126332 , April 30, 2014.

Pain assessment is a complex task largely dependent on the patient's self-report. Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising tool for automating and objectifying pain assessment through the identification of pain-related facial expressions. However, the capabilities and potential of AI in clinical settings are still largely unknown to many medical professionals. In this literature review, we present a conceptual understanding of the application of AI to detect pain through facial expressions. We provide an overview of the current state of the art as well as the technical foundations of AI/ML techniques used in pain detection. We highlight the ethical challenges and the limitations associated with the use of AI in pain detection, such as the scarcity of databases, confounding factors, and medical conditions that affect the shape and mobility of the face. The review also highlights the potential impact of AI on pain assessment in clinical practice and lays the groundwork for further study in this area.