Introduction:

sedation in the critically patient requiring mechanical ventilation is an important intervention used to provide safety and comfort to the patient. Currently, the management of critically ill patients is based on the ABCDEF bundle (A [assess]: prevent and manage pain. B [both]: protocols for daily interruption of sedation and spontaneous breathing protocol. C [choice]: of analgesia and sedation. D [delirium]: assess, prevent and manage delirium. E [early]: exercise and early mobility. F [family]: inclusion and empowerment) which recommends daily interruption of sedation and a daily spontaneous breathing protocol, it has shown improvement in clinical outcomes (days on mechanical ventilation, delirium). This contrasts with the frequent management of continuous intravenous sedation. Therefore, in this study the safety of these two forms of sedation (daily interruption vs continuous intravenous) will be compared.

Objective:

to compare the incidence of cardiovascular events and desaturation between a protocol of daily interruption of sedation in patients with invasive mechanical ventilation versus continuous intravenous sedation in patients with invasive mechanical ventilation.

Material and methods:

retrospective comparative descriptive study.

Results:

there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of cardiac events and desaturation between patients with continuous intravenous sedation and daily sedation interruption protocol.

Conclusion:

continuous intravenous sedation and daily interruption of sedation protocol are equally safe in critically ill patients.