کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
2765111 | 1150954 | 2013 | 7 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
PurposeTo assess the safety and feasibility of treating critically ill adults with different fever control strategies.MethodsThis was a pilot, open-label clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01173367) that randomized febrile patients to an aggressive or permissive fever control strategy. For the aggressive and permissive groups, antipyretic therapy (acetaminophen, physical cooling) was administered when the temperature was ≥ 38.3°C and ≥ 40.0°C respectively. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality.ResultsTwo hundred patients experienced a fever (31% of the originally projected estimate), among which 26 were randomized to the aggressive (n = 14) or permissive (n = 12) arm. The aggressive group received a greater dose of acetaminophen (2275 mg vs 0 mg, P = .0001), and more frequently received physical cooling than patients in the permissive group (57% vs 8%, P = .01). The mean daily temperature was lower in the aggressive group (37.8°C vs 38.0°C, P = .02). There was no difference in the primary outcome (21% vs 17%, P = 1.0) or in any safety outcome between the treatment groups.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated the safety and feasibility of administering antipyretic therapy in critically ill adults. The key finding was a lower than expected incidence of fever.
Journal: Journal of Critical Care - Volume 28, Issue 3, June 2013, Pages 296–302