Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT04983615

Opioid vs. Benzodiazepine-based Sedation for Mechanically Ventilated Patients in the Internal Medicine Ward

Opioid-based sedation as a first line in mechanically ventilated patients has been considered the "gold standard" in intensive care unit patients around the world for several decades. Advantages of opiate-based sedation, compared to benzodiazepine-based sedation, which has been used in the past, include a reduction in delirium scores, better pain control, decreasing the time between cessation of sedation and patient awakening, and decreasing the time between cessation of sedation and extubation, with decreased ICU admission times.

In most Western European countries, as well as in the United States, there are almost no mechanically ventilated patients hospitalized outside the intensive care unit. In a few countries, including Japan and Israel, mechanically ventilated patients are also hospitalized outside of intensive care units, as part of internal or surgical wards. Contrary to the vast knowledge accumulated regarding different sedation methods in ventilated patients in intensive care units, there are almost no studies that have evaluated different sedation methods in ventilated patients hospitalized in non-intensive care wards. Thus, while there is consensus on the benefits of opioid-based sedation in intensive care units, there is insufficient information to recommend the preferred sedation method in non-ICU wards.

For various reasons, in a large number of the internal medicine wards of hospitals in Israel, the common sedation practice for ventilated patients is still benzodiazepine-based sedation. In the past year, a pilot program was initiated in Internal Medicine Department A at Meir Hospital in Kfar Saba, in which a new protocol for opioid-based sedation in ventilated patients was implemented.

The protocol is based on the continuous intravenous infusion of fentanyl as the first line of treatment for sedation in ventilated patients only. If the sedation-agitation level (as measured by the RASS score) did not match the target RASS score set by the attending physician, a dose up to a maximum limit could be increased according to the protocol. Second-line sedation drugs were addition of continuous intravenous infusion of midazolam (in addition to fentanyl) in hemodynamically stable patients, or addition of continuous intravenous infusion of ketamine in unstable patients. In stable patients who did not reach the desired RASS level under continuous infusion of fentanyl and midazolam, ketamine could be added as a third line drug, in addition to fentanyl and midazolam.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–99 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Meir medical center Kfar Saba

Kfar Saba, Israel

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

Patients aged 18-99 who were admitted to Internal Medicine Department A at Meir Hospital in Kfar Saba from January 2020 to January 2021 (inclusive), and required mechanical ventilation.

-

Exclusion criteria

Patients who were sedated and ventilated for palliative care only without any fututre plan for weaning them of ventilation, or patients in whom there was a deviation from the treatment protocol

-

Treatment and study plan

fentanyl-based sedation

Drug

fentanyl-based sedation instead of midazolam-based sedation in ventilated patients

midazolam-based sedation

Drug

midazolam-based sedation

Primary outcomes

  1. RASS score

    Time frame: 1 year

    comparison of delirium score between the groups

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Meir Medical Center

Other

Registry information

Important dates

Study start
2021
Primary completion
2024
Study completion
2024
First posted
Jul 30, 2021
Registry last updated
May 8, 2025

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.