Background: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients are often sedated, yet sedation assessment scales have not been thoroughly studied in this population. This project inquiry describes the use of the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) in assessing sedation in TBI patients. Methods: A retrospective, descriptive analysis of 38 ventilated, sedated TBI patients was performed to describe 1) the characteristics of the study TBI population, 2) the use of the RASS to guide titration of sedation medication, and 3) the nursing perspective of a sedation titration protocol that includes the use of the RASS. Results: Prescribed RASS score for the study population was -2; the actual RASS score was -2.04 +/-1.05. The days spent on mechanical ventilation were 3.46 +/- 1.95. The Injury Severity Score (ISS) correlated with sedation titration (r = -0.373; p<.05). The ICD-9 code also correlated with the RASS (r = -0.400; p<0.05). There was no correlation between RASS and sedation titration (r = -0.061; p = 0.717). The majority of nurses perceived that when using the RASS, sedation level did not affect their feeling of accuracy of neurological assessment (56%), and the patient's agitation level did not affect their feeling of accurate neurological assessment (58%). Conclusion: While the degree of injury was associated with the ability of the TBI patient to maintain the prescribed RASS level, there was no association between the RASS score and sedation titration, indicating that in this small study, the RASS did not guide sedation titration in the TBI population. However, the time spent at the prescribed RASS level and days of mechanical ventilation, which was similar to reported norms, suggest that the RASS is an adequate tool for assessing sedation in the TBI population. From the nursing perspective, the use of the RASS was not a barrier in assessing sedation titration. To our knowledge, this is the first study to describe the use of RASS for assessment of sedation in TBI patients. Additional prospective studies are necessary to fully understand the ability of the RASS to guide sedation titration.

Syfte: Att undersöka om frånvaro av sederingsmål påverkar sederingsnivå samt att kartlägga sederingsdjupet, bedömt enligt Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS-skalan) hos intuberade patienter på IVA, Norrlands Universitetssjukhus (NUS). Bakgrund: Vikten av en adekvat sedering är något som medvetandegjorts de senaste åren och trenden inom intensivvård har gått från användandet av djup sedering med muskelblockad till en mer ytlig sederingsstrategi. Översedering leder till olika former av komplikationer i form av förlängd ventilatortid och vårdtid samt ökad mortalitet. Undersedering ökar riskerna för stress och smärta. En adekvat sederingsnivå innebär att patienten är lugn och komfortabel men lättväckt. För att erhålla den optimala sederingsnivån och därigenom undvika de negativa effekterna av både över- och undersedering, är sederingsskalor ett viktigt hjälpmedel. Design: En journalgranskning med kvantitativ ansats och med retrospektiv design utfördes. Metod: Under perioden 1 januari till 30 juni vårdades totalt 422 patienter på IVA, NUS. Efter granskning enligt inklusions- och exklusionskriterier återstod 46 patienter som ingick i studien. Journalerna granskades med avseende på ordinerade mål och bedömda nivåer enligt RASS. Populationsbeskrivning samt insamlade RASS mål och nivåer fördes in i Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS 23,0). Resultat: Hos studiens 46 patienter registrerades totalt 216 dygn där patienterna varit sederade och intuberade. Av dessa saknades ordinerat sederingsmål 47% av dygnen. Frånvaro av ordinerat sederingsmål påverkade inte sederingsdjupet så att statistisk signifikant skillnad förelåg mellan patienter med och utan mål. Totalt registrerades 1048 uppmätta RASS nivåer med syfte att kartlägga sederingsdjup. Medelvärdet för varje enskild patient per dygn räknades ut och alla medelvärden sammanställdes. Sederingsdjupen låg på en lägre nivå än -3 de första fyra dygnen för att därefter gå mot en ytligare nivå. Konklusion: Genom att identifierar bakomliggande faktorer till smärta och oro kan sjuksköterskan bidra med att minska många negativa konsekvenser av inadekvat sedering. Det var ett positivt fynd att sederingsdjupen förändrades över tid till en mer, enligt litteraturen adekvat, sederingsnivå. Utifrån resultatet ses ett behov av fler studier för att kunna utröna vad som påverkar RASS-nivåerna och för att utvärdera hur adekvat sederade patienter är. Det skulle vara av intresse att undersöka detta på en större population och under en längre tidsperiod. / Aim: To investigate if absence of goals for sedation affect the level of sedation and to map out the depth of sedation, assessed according to the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS-scale) on intubated patients at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), Norrlands Universitetssjukhus (NUS). Background: The importance of adequate sedation is something that has been raised to awareness the last years and the trend within intensive care has gone from extensive use of sedatives with neuromuscular blocking agents to a more lightly sedative strategy. Over-sedation leads to different kinds of complications such as prolonged mechanical ventilation and hospital stay and also increases mortality rates. Under-sedation increases the risk for stress and pain. An adequate level of sedation is defined as when the patient is calm and comfortable yet easy to arouse from sleep. To obtain the appropriate level of sedation, and thereby avoiding the negative effects of both over- and under-sedation, sedation scales are an important tool. Design: Data was collected using medical records. A quantitative approach with retrospective design was performed. Method: From january 1st to june 30th 2015 a totalt of 422 patients were admitted to the ICU, NUS. After auditing the medical reccords according to the inclusion- and exklusionkriterias 46 patients were included in the study. The medical records were audited regarding sedation goals and sedation scores according to the RASS scale. All collected patients’ characteristics, RASS goals and levels were typed in to the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS 23,0). Results: The 46 patients in the study were sedated and intubated a totalt of 216 days. Sedation goals were absent 47% of those days. An absence of sedation goals did not affect the depth of sedation, there were no significant difference between patients with and without sedation goals. In totalt 1048 sedation scores as measured by the RASS scale were collected with the purpose of maping out the sedation depth. The mean for each patient per every 24 hours were calculated and compiled. The sedation scores were lower than -3 the first four days, thereafter the scores changed towards a less heavy sedation. Conclusion: By identifying underlying factors for pain and anxiety, the ICU nurse can reduce the many negative consequences of inadequate sedation. It was a positive finding that the depth of sedation changed over time towards a, according to previous studies, more appropriate level of sedation. The results indicate that there is a need for further studies to investigate what affect the levels of sedation and to assess how appropriate patients are sedated. It would be of interest to examine this on a larger group of patients and for a longer period of time.