# Anesthesia, Sedation, and Unplanned Extubation of Tracheal Intubation in Children with Severe Pneumonia

Authors: Zengchun Wang; Qiang Chen; Lingshan Yu; Yu Huang; Hua Cao
Journal: Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
 (2021)

---

## Abstract

We randomly divided 200 children with severe pneumonia who met the indications for tracheal intubation into 2 groups in this prospective study. One group that received dexmedetomidine for sedation was recorded as the dexmedetomidine group (n = 100), and the group that received midazolam for sedation was recorded as the midazolam group (n = 100). We compared the anesthesia sedation scores, time to fall asleep, time to wake up from anesthesia, related hemodynamic parameters, and adverse reactions between the two groups of children. The failure mode and effect analysis method (FMEA) was also used to investigate the causes of unplanned extubation (UEX) of tracheal intubation in 32 children with severe pneumonia. Our conclusion is as follows: (1) Compared with midazolam, the comprehensive effect of dexmedetomidine on children with severe pneumonia undergoing tracheal intubation for anesthesia and sedation is better, it can effectively shorten the anesthesia induction time and the recovery time after stopping the drug, and there are few adverse reactions, which is worthy of application and promotion. (2) UEX is an important risk factor in the monitoring and nursing of children with severe pneumonia tracheal intubation, and the nursing method of PDCA cycle management is particularly important for them.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Severe pneumonia is a more common critical illness in pediatrics, and some children often need mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure [1, 2]. Mechanical ventilation is a treatment that can effectively improve the clinical symptoms of children. However, during tracheal intubation, affected by factors such as low tolerance and emotional instability in children, it is usually necessary to take effective anesthesia and sedation for children [3]. Midazolam is one of the classic drugs for clinical anesthesia and sedation and belongs to benzodiazepines, which is suitable for pediatric surgical treatment because of its rapid onset and low toxicity [4, 5]. But it also has a certain dose-dependent effect and will cause a slight inhibition of the respiratory system, so its advantages in the treatment of children with severe pneumonia are not very significant [6]. Dexmedetomidine is a new type of sedative drug that has emerged in the past 10 years. It has an analgesic effect, inhibits sympathetic nerve activity without inhibiting respiration, has an ideal sedative effect, and is suitable for the anesthesia and sedation treatment of children with severe pneumonia [7, 8]. In view of the fact that the current application of dexmedetomidine in adults is relatively mature, but compared with traditional sedative drugs, its advantages in pediatric anesthesia and sedation are still in the exploratory stage. Therefore, we analyzed and compared the anesthetic sedation effect and safety of midazolam and dexmedetomidine for mechanical ventilation in children with severe pneumonia, in order to provide a relevant reference for the clinical sedation of children with severe pneumonia.In addition, considering that unplanned extubation (UEX) is an important potential risk for pediatric children with tracheal intubation [9], it refers to the patient pulling out the intubation without the consent of the medical staff or the intubation falling off due to an accident or improper operation of the medical staff [10]. UEX can lead to airway injury and aggravation of the condition of patients with tracheal intubation and, in severe cases, asphyxia and other life-threatening situations, which are not conducive to the early recovery and discharge of patients [11]. Based on this, this study also used failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) to investigate the main risks and failure causes of children with endotracheal intubation with UEX and discussed the key points of improving nursing management based on the above reasons. See the following for details.


## 2. Materials and Methods

### 2.1. General Data

From January 2018 to April 2021, 200 children with severe pneumonia who met the indications for tracheal intubation were randomly divided into 2 groups. One group that received dexmedetomidine for sedation was recorded as the dexmedetomidine group (n = 100), and the group that received midazolam for sedation was recorded as the midazolam group (n = 100). There was no significant difference in the general information in Table 1 between the two groups of children, and they could be compared (P>0.05).Table 1
Comparison of general data between the 2 groups.
General dataMidazolam group (n = 100)Dexmedetomidine group (n = 100)χ2/tPGender (boy/girl)57/4355/450.0810.776Age (years)5.96 ± 3.446.31 ± 3.280.7360.462Weight (kg)24.83 ± 8.8125.60 ± 9.050.6100.543PCIS score (scores)74.54 ± 4.5675.31 ± 5.221.1110.268Mechanical ventilation time (min)1225.37 ± 69.581217.91 ± 70.460.7530.452


### 2.2. Inclusion Criteria

The inclusion criteria included the following: (1) those who met the “Expert Consensus on Clinical Practice of Severe Emergency Pneumonia in China” for the diagnosis of severe pneumonia; (2) those under the age of 14; (3) those who met the indications for tracheal intubation and were intubated through the mouth; (4) those with normal physical, cognitive, and IQ development; (5) expected intubation time greater than or equal to 48 h; (6) those whose family members had signed and agreed.


### 2.3. Exclusion Criteria

The exclusion criteria included the following: (1) those who had a history of allergy or addiction to the drugs in this study; (2) those who used other sedatives during the study; (3) those with bradycardia or atrioventricular blocks II and III; (4) those who had been diagnosed or suspected of having encephalitis, epilepsy, and other types of central nervous system damage; (5) those with severe liver and kidney dysfunction.


### 2.4. Research Methods

(1)
Anesthesia and sedation methods: The two groups of children were subjected to continuous ECG, noninvasive blood pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), and pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2) detection. On this basis, the midazolam group was first given midazolam (Zhejiang Jiuxu Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., National Drug Approval H20113387) at a loading dose of 0.3 mg/kg intravenously, followed by continuous intravenous pumping of 0.03–0.5 mg/kg·h for maintenance; in the dexmedetomidine group, dexmedetomidine hydrochloride (Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., National Drug Approval H20090248) was injected intravenously with a loading dose of 0.5 ug/kg, followed by continuous intravenous pumping of 0.2∼0.5 ug/kg·h for maintenance. The specific dose was adjusted according to the sedative effect and tolerance of the child.(2)
FMEA method: Set up an FMEA team, which consisted of the head nurse of the department, the head of the nursing team, the responsible nurse, and the junior nurse. All team members received systematic training on FMEA knowledge and also received medical supervision. According to the FMEA method, the operation flowchart was drawn, and the monitoring and nursing process of all children with tracheal intubation was divided into oral care, turning over and patting back, protective restraint, airway care, handover situation, irritating cough, and airbag management. The number and reasons of UEX in all children during tracheal intubation were analyzed, and the risk priority number (RPN) of the failure mode was calculated.


### 2.5. Observation Indicators

(1)
The Ramsay scores of the 2 groups of children before (T0) and 1 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, and 48 h (T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5) after treatment were compared. The Ramsay score was divided into the following grades: 1 represents restlessness; 2 represents directional ability and quiet cooperation; 3 represents lethargy and ability to obey commands; 4 represents light sleep that can be quickly awakened; 5 represents sleep states that are slow to respond to calls; 6 represents deep sleep without waking up.(2)
The time to fall asleep and wake up from anesthesia of the 2 groups of children was compared.(3)
The relevant hemodynamic parameters (MA, HR, and SpO2) at T0, T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5 in the 2 groups were compared.(4)
The incidence of adverse reactions such as hypotension, bradycardia, and delirium in the 2 groups was compared.(5)
The number of times and causes of UEX in all children during tracheal intubation were counted. The RPN values of the failure modes of the 7 nursing procedures in this group were calculated. RPN = occurrence (O) of risk × severity (S) of risk × detectability (D) of risk.


### 2.6. Statistical Methods

Using SPSS22.0 software, measurement data were expressed as (x¯ ± s), F test was used for comparison between multiple groups, and t analysis was performed for pairwise comparison between groups. The count data were expressed in percentage (%), and the χ2 test was adopted. P<0.05 indicated that the difference was statistically significant.


## 2.1. General Data

From January 2018 to April 2021, 200 children with severe pneumonia who met the indications for tracheal intubation were randomly divided into 2 groups. One group that received dexmedetomidine for sedation was recorded as the dexmedetomidine group (n = 100), and the group that received midazolam for sedation was recorded as the midazolam group (n = 100). There was no significant difference in the general information in Table 1 between the two groups of children, and they could be compared (P>0.05).Table 1
Comparison of general data between the 2 groups.
General dataMidazolam group (n = 100)Dexmedetomidine group (n = 100)χ2/tPGender (boy/girl)57/4355/450.0810.776Age (years)5.96 ± 3.446.31 ± 3.280.7360.462Weight (kg)24.83 ± 8.8125.60 ± 9.050.6100.543PCIS score (scores)74.54 ± 4.5675.31 ± 5.221.1110.268Mechanical ventilation time (min)1225.37 ± 69.581217.91 ± 70.460.7530.452


## 2.2. Inclusion Criteria

The inclusion criteria included the following: (1) those who met the “Expert Consensus on Clinical Practice of Severe Emergency Pneumonia in China” for the diagnosis of severe pneumonia; (2) those under the age of 14; (3) those who met the indications for tracheal intubation and were intubated through the mouth; (4) those with normal physical, cognitive, and IQ development; (5) expected intubation time greater than or equal to 48 h; (6) those whose family members had signed and agreed.


## 2.3. Exclusion Criteria

The exclusion criteria included the following: (1) those who had a history of allergy or addiction to the drugs in this study; (2) those who used other sedatives during the study; (3) those with bradycardia or atrioventricular blocks II and III; (4) those who had been diagnosed or suspected of having encephalitis, epilepsy, and other types of central nervous system damage; (5) those with severe liver and kidney dysfunction.


## 2.4. Research Methods

(1)
Anesthesia and sedation methods: The two groups of children were subjected to continuous ECG, noninvasive blood pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), and pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2) detection. On this basis, the midazolam group was first given midazolam (Zhejiang Jiuxu Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., National Drug Approval H20113387) at a loading dose of 0.3 mg/kg intravenously, followed by continuous intravenous pumping of 0.03–0.5 mg/kg·h for maintenance; in the dexmedetomidine group, dexmedetomidine hydrochloride (Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., National Drug Approval H20090248) was injected intravenously with a loading dose of 0.5 ug/kg, followed by continuous intravenous pumping of 0.2∼0.5 ug/kg·h for maintenance. The specific dose was adjusted according to the sedative effect and tolerance of the child.(2)
FMEA method: Set up an FMEA team, which consisted of the head nurse of the department, the head of the nursing team, the responsible nurse, and the junior nurse. All team members received systematic training on FMEA knowledge and also received medical supervision. According to the FMEA method, the operation flowchart was drawn, and the monitoring and nursing process of all children with tracheal intubation was divided into oral care, turning over and patting back, protective restraint, airway care, handover situation, irritating cough, and airbag management. The number and reasons of UEX in all children during tracheal intubation were analyzed, and the risk priority number (RPN) of the failure mode was calculated.


## 2.5. Observation Indicators

(1)
The Ramsay scores of the 2 groups of children before (T0) and 1 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, and 48 h (T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5) after treatment were compared. The Ramsay score was divided into the following grades: 1 represents restlessness; 2 represents directional ability and quiet cooperation; 3 represents lethargy and ability to obey commands; 4 represents light sleep that can be quickly awakened; 5 represents sleep states that are slow to respond to calls; 6 represents deep sleep without waking up.(2)
The time to fall asleep and wake up from anesthesia of the 2 groups of children was compared.(3)
The relevant hemodynamic parameters (MA, HR, and SpO2) at T0, T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5 in the 2 groups were compared.(4)
The incidence of adverse reactions such as hypotension, bradycardia, and delirium in the 2 groups was compared.(5)
The number of times and causes of UEX in all children during tracheal intubation were counted. The RPN values of the failure modes of the 7 nursing procedures in this group were calculated. RPN = occurrence (O) of risk × severity (S) of risk × detectability (D) of risk.


## 2.6. Statistical Methods

Using SPSS22.0 software, measurement data were expressed as (x¯ ± s), F test was used for comparison between multiple groups, and t analysis was performed for pairwise comparison between groups. The count data were expressed in percentage (%), and the χ2 test was adopted. P<0.05 indicated that the difference was statistically significant.


## 3. Results

### 3.1. Comparison of Ramsay Scores between the 2 Groups

AtT0, T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, the Ramsay scores of the midazolam group were 1.12 ± 0.39, 2.03 ± 0.54, 3.22 ± 0.69, 3.36 ± 0.64, 3.17 ± 0.67, and 3.06 ± 0.54 scores, respectively; Ramsay scores of the dexmedetomidine group were 1.09 ± 0.42, 2.60 ± 0.60, 3.03 ± 0.68, 3.19 ± 0.63, 3.35 ± 0.68, and 3.21 ± 0.57 scores, respectively. The Ramsay scores of the 2 groups at T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5 were significantly higher than those of the same group at T0, and T2, T3, T4, and T5 were significantly higher than those of the same group at T1 (P<0.001). The Ramsay scores of the two groups were not statistically different at T0, T2, T3, T4, and T5 (P>0.05). At T1, the Ramsay score of the dexmedetomidine group was significantly higher than that of the midazolam group (P<0.001) (Figure 1).Figure 1
Comparison of Ramsay scores between the 2 groups (x¯ ± s, scores). Note: compared with the same group at T0, P∗<0.001; compared with the same group at T1, P#<0.001; compared with the midazolam group at T1, ^P<0.001.


### 3.2. Comparison of the Time to Fall Asleep and Wake Up from Anesthesia between the 2 Groups

The time to fall asleep during anesthesia in the dexmedetomidine group (14.13 ± 2.92 min) was significantly shorter than that in the midazolam group (22.02 ± 2.54 min) (P<0.001). The recovery time from anesthesia in the dexmedetomidine group (20.45 ± 5.58 min) was significantly shorter than that in the midazolam group (28.62 ± 6.39 min) (P<0.001) (Figure 2).Figure 2
Comparison of the time to fall asleep and wake up from anesthesia between the 2 groups (x¯ ± s, min). Note: compared with the midazolam group, P∗<0.001.


### 3.3. Comparison of Hemodynamic Parameters between the 2 Groups

There was no statistical difference between the 2 groups of MAP and HR atT0 (P>0.05). There was no statistical difference between the 2 groups of SpO2 at the time points of T0, T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5 (P>0.05). The MAP and HR of the 2 groups were significantly lower than T0 at T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, and the HR of the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that of the midazolam group (P<0.001) (Figure 3).Figure 3
Comparison of hemodynamic parameters between the 2 groups (x¯ ± s). Note: compared with the same group at T0, P∗<0.001; compared with the midazolam group at the same time, ^P<0.001.
(a)(b)(c)


### 3.4. Comparison of Adverse Reaction Rate between the 2 Groups

The incidences of hypotension, bradycardia, and delirium in the midazolam group were 2.00% (2/100), 4.00% (4/100), and 15.00% (15/100), respectively. The incidences of hypotension, bradycardia, and delirium in the dexmedetomidine group were 1.00% (1/100), 2.00% (2/100), and 3.00% (3/100), respectively. The incidence of delirium in the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that in the midazolam group (P<0.05) (Figure 4).Figure 4
Comparison of adverse reaction rate between the 2 groups (n (%)). Note: compared with the midazolam group, P∗<0.05.


### 3.5. Analysis of the Causes of UEX in Children with Severe Pneumonia after Tracheal Intubation

After tracheal intubation of 200 children with severe pneumonia in this group, the incidence of UEX was 16.00% (32/200). Among them, oral care, turning over and patting back, protective restraint, and airway care were the top 4 causes of UEX, respectively, accounting for 21.88% (7/32), 18.75% (6/32), 15.63% (5/32), and 15.63% (5/32) of the total (Table2).Table 2
Analysis of the causes of UEX in children with severe pneumonia after tracheal intubation (n (%)).
CausesNumber of cases (n = 32)Incidence rate (%)Oral care721.88Turning over and patting back618.75Protective restraint515.63Airway care515.63Handover situation412.50Irritating cough412.50Airbag management13.13


### 3.6. The RPN Value of the Failure Modes of the 7 Nursing Procedures in This Group

Sorted by RPN value, the RPN values of this group of protective restraint, airbag management, oral care, handover situation, turning over and patting back, irritating cough, and airway care are 280, 270, 147, 96, 72, 60, and 50, respectively (Table3).Table 3
The RPN value of the failure modes of the 7 nursing procedures in this group.
Nursing proceduresFailure modesReason for failureOSDRPNProtective restraintInsufficient protective restraintLack of predictability by nurses785280Airbag managementMissing monitoringUnscientific method695270Oral careClean mouth operationInsufficient experience and improper operation773147Handover situationInsufficient execution of nursesInsufficient attention to detail and familiarity68296Turning over and patting backLack of preparationInsufficient experience, improper operation66272Irritating coughIncomplete assessmentNoncough predictive assessment56260Airway careIrregular operation processInsufficient inspection55250


## 3.1. Comparison of Ramsay Scores between the 2 Groups

AtT0, T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, the Ramsay scores of the midazolam group were 1.12 ± 0.39, 2.03 ± 0.54, 3.22 ± 0.69, 3.36 ± 0.64, 3.17 ± 0.67, and 3.06 ± 0.54 scores, respectively; Ramsay scores of the dexmedetomidine group were 1.09 ± 0.42, 2.60 ± 0.60, 3.03 ± 0.68, 3.19 ± 0.63, 3.35 ± 0.68, and 3.21 ± 0.57 scores, respectively. The Ramsay scores of the 2 groups at T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5 were significantly higher than those of the same group at T0, and T2, T3, T4, and T5 were significantly higher than those of the same group at T1 (P<0.001). The Ramsay scores of the two groups were not statistically different at T0, T2, T3, T4, and T5 (P>0.05). At T1, the Ramsay score of the dexmedetomidine group was significantly higher than that of the midazolam group (P<0.001) (Figure 1).Figure 1
Comparison of Ramsay scores between the 2 groups (x¯ ± s, scores). Note: compared with the same group at T0, P∗<0.001; compared with the same group at T1, P#<0.001; compared with the midazolam group at T1, ^P<0.001.


## 3.2. Comparison of the Time to Fall Asleep and Wake Up from Anesthesia between the 2 Groups

The time to fall asleep during anesthesia in the dexmedetomidine group (14.13 ± 2.92 min) was significantly shorter than that in the midazolam group (22.02 ± 2.54 min) (P<0.001). The recovery time from anesthesia in the dexmedetomidine group (20.45 ± 5.58 min) was significantly shorter than that in the midazolam group (28.62 ± 6.39 min) (P<0.001) (Figure 2).Figure 2
Comparison of the time to fall asleep and wake up from anesthesia between the 2 groups (x¯ ± s, min). Note: compared with the midazolam group, P∗<0.001.


## 3.3. Comparison of Hemodynamic Parameters between the 2 Groups

There was no statistical difference between the 2 groups of MAP and HR atT0 (P>0.05). There was no statistical difference between the 2 groups of SpO2 at the time points of T0, T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5 (P>0.05). The MAP and HR of the 2 groups were significantly lower than T0 at T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, and the HR of the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that of the midazolam group (P<0.001) (Figure 3).Figure 3
Comparison of hemodynamic parameters between the 2 groups (x¯ ± s). Note: compared with the same group at T0, P∗<0.001; compared with the midazolam group at the same time, ^P<0.001.
(a)(b)(c)


## 3.4. Comparison of Adverse Reaction Rate between the 2 Groups

The incidences of hypotension, bradycardia, and delirium in the midazolam group were 2.00% (2/100), 4.00% (4/100), and 15.00% (15/100), respectively. The incidences of hypotension, bradycardia, and delirium in the dexmedetomidine group were 1.00% (1/100), 2.00% (2/100), and 3.00% (3/100), respectively. The incidence of delirium in the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that in the midazolam group (P<0.05) (Figure 4).Figure 4
Comparison of adverse reaction rate between the 2 groups (n (%)). Note: compared with the midazolam group, P∗<0.05.


## 3.5. Analysis of the Causes of UEX in Children with Severe Pneumonia after Tracheal Intubation

After tracheal intubation of 200 children with severe pneumonia in this group, the incidence of UEX was 16.00% (32/200). Among them, oral care, turning over and patting back, protective restraint, and airway care were the top 4 causes of UEX, respectively, accounting for 21.88% (7/32), 18.75% (6/32), 15.63% (5/32), and 15.63% (5/32) of the total (Table2).Table 2
Analysis of the causes of UEX in children with severe pneumonia after tracheal intubation (n (%)).
CausesNumber of cases (n = 32)Incidence rate (%)Oral care721.88Turning over and patting back618.75Protective restraint515.63Airway care515.63Handover situation412.50Irritating cough412.50Airbag management13.13


## 3.6. The RPN Value of the Failure Modes of the 7 Nursing Procedures in This Group

Sorted by RPN value, the RPN values of this group of protective restraint, airbag management, oral care, handover situation, turning over and patting back, irritating cough, and airway care are 280, 270, 147, 96, 72, 60, and 50, respectively (Table3).Table 3
The RPN value of the failure modes of the 7 nursing procedures in this group.
Nursing proceduresFailure modesReason for failureOSDRPNProtective restraintInsufficient protective restraintLack of predictability by nurses785280Airbag managementMissing monitoringUnscientific method695270Oral careClean mouth operationInsufficient experience and improper operation773147Handover situationInsufficient execution of nursesInsufficient attention to detail and familiarity68296Turning over and patting backLack of preparationInsufficient experience, improper operation66272Irritating coughIncomplete assessmentNoncough predictive assessment56260Airway careIrregular operation processInsufficient inspection55250


## 4. Discussion

Severe pneumonia is a common respiratory disease in children, and it is also one of the main causes of death in hospitalized children under 5 years of age [12]. The disease has a rapid onset, rapid changes in the condition, and a dangerous situation. It can often cause severe hypoxemia and even acute respiratory failure and other complications [13]. At this time, the child needs to be treated with artificial mechanical ventilation, which includes two methods: noninvasive and invasive. In view of the immature airway development in children, the inner wall of the lumen is rich in blood vessels, the mucosa is prone to congestion and edema, and the oxygen supply for noninvasive ventilation is limited. Therefore, it is often necessary to establish an artificial airway through the mouth or the nose and connect the ventilator. However, tracheal intubation can stimulate the respiratory tract of children, bring physical discomfort to children, and trigger different degrees of stress response [14]. Therefore, when children are mechanically ventilated, appropriate anesthesia and sedation are often needed to relieve the pain of the child and increase the success rate of intubation.Midazolam is currently a commonly used sedative drug for mechanical ventilation in children, but it has many shortcomings. It cannot effectively inhibit the stress response caused by the endotracheal tube, and long-term infusion may cause adverse reactions such as delayed awakening of children, so the sedative effect is poor [15]. Dexmedetomidine is a highly potent and highly selective α2 adrenergic receptor agonist [16]. It has no inhibition on breathing and has a protective effect on the functions of the heart, brain, kidney, and other organs. Its central antisympathetic effect can help patients produce a sedative effect similar to natural sleep [17]. In addition, it can also relieve pain, diuresis, and antianxiety [18]. Therefore, it is usually used for sedation treatment in surgery or invasive examination.In this study, two methods were used for anesthesia sedation in children with severe pneumonia. The results showed that Ramsay score atT1, T2, T3, T4, and T5 was significantly higher than that at T0 and at T2, T3, T4, and T5 was significantly higher than that at T1. Ramsay score at T1 was significantly higher in the dexmedetomidine group than that in the midazolam group. This suggests that continuous intravenous pumping therapy with midazolam or dexmedetomidine can all achieve satisfactory sedation effect in children with severe pneumonia undergoing endotracheal intubation. In the results, the time to fall asleep and wake up from anesthesia in the dexmedetomidine group was significantly shorter than that in the midazolam group. The MAP and HR of the two groups at T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5 were significantly lower than T0 (all within the normal range), and the HR of the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that of the midazolam group. This shows that, compared with midazolam sedation treatment, dexmedetomidine has a better effect on achieving the ideal sedation level and ideal hemodynamic state and can effectively shorten the awakening time of children from anesthesia, which will help reduce the damage to important organs of children due to the stress of tracheal intubation and promote the child’s recovery as soon as possible. Analyzing the reasons, this may be related to the sedative effect of dexmedetomidine, which is a natural sleep state that can be awakened and has no accumulation effect [19]. The use of sedative and analgesic drugs and psychotropic drugs is an important risk factor for delirium [20]. Studies have also pointed out that the application of midazolam is an independent risk factor for delirium [21]. Its occurrence is related to the sedative mechanism of midazolam (activation of γ-aminobutyric acid receptors) [22]. The results of this study showed that the incidence of delirium in the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that in the midazolam group, which was consistent with previous studies [23]. Analyzing the reasons, dexmedetomidine is currently the main therapeutic drug for clinical prevention of postoperative delirium. It can stimulate central and peripheral α2 adrenergic receptor agonists and achieves antidelirium effects through the following two mechanisms: (1) It can inhibit the activation of γ-aminobutyric acid receptors, stimulate cholinergic receptors, maintain the stability of the microenvironment of the central nervous system, protect neuronal cell membranes from toxic neurotransmitters, and thereby reduce the occurrence of delirium. (2) Because benzodiazepines sedative and hypnotics have been confirmed to be related to the occurrence of delirium, dexmedetomidine may have reduced the dosage of midazolam in children by substitution, which in turn indirectly reduced the occurrence of delirium [24].In this study, FMEA was also used to investigate the main risks and failure causes of tracheal intubation in children with UEX. Among the results, oral care, turning over and patting back, protective restraint, and airway care were the top 4 causes of UEX. Improper operation of protective restraint, airbag management, and oral care ranked the top 3 in RPN. Specific analysis of the reasons is as follows. In oral care, the lack of experience of nursing staff or improper nursing is the common reason that leads to the slip of fixed tape or the destruction of adhesive force of fixed tape and catheter prolapse. In turning over and back patting, single operation is an important factor leading to catheter accidental extraction. In protective restraint, nurses have insufficient anticipation of physical restraint in tense and uncooperative children, which easily leads to the unconscious or conscious self-extraction of the catheter in children. In airway care, the nursing staff’s inspection is not careful enough, and they fail to notice the loosening or a small amount of pulling out of the intubation in time, which may lead to the accidental shedding of the catheter after repeated accumulation.Therefore, in order to continuously improve the problems in nursing work, improve the quality of nursing management, and reduce the occurrence of UEX, we advocate the nursing method of Plan-Do-Check-Action (PDCA) cycle management for such children [25]. It requires that during the implementation of nursing, medical staff should strengthen the psychological dredge of children and relieve the tension of children. In the operation of oral care, nursing staff should strengthen the effective fixation and observation of tape and can use sticky and tough tape cross fixation to double insurance; if it is loose, it shall be replaced in time. When changing the position of the child or turning over the back, avoid single operation and excessive pulling of the catheter. When implementing protective restraints, the foreseeability of limb restraint failures should be enhanced, soft cushions should be placed on both sides of the child’s neck to prevent head twisting, the limbs should be restrained, and at the same time, regular active and passive activities should be performed to relax muscles and prevent spasms. At the same time, the competent physician and intubator are invited to evaluate the pressure of the airbag and the intubation pipe; once the extubation indication is met, the catheter is removed in time. In addition, medical staff should also strengthen the learning progress of UEX-related knowledge, regularly carry out relevant functional knowledge training, and constantly standardize the operation of catheter nursing, so as to reduce the occurrence of UEX in children with tracheal intubation and ensure the safety of intubation in children.


## 5. Conclusion

Compared with midazolam, the comprehensive effect of dexmedetomidine on children with severe pneumonia undergoing tracheal intubation for anesthesia and sedation is better, it can effectively shorten the anesthesia induction time and the recovery time after stopping the drug, and there are few adverse reactions, which is worthy of application and promotion. UEX is an important risk factor in the monitoring and nursing of children with severe pneumonia tracheal intubation, and the nursing method of PDCA cycle management is particularly important for them.



---

*Source: 4802389-2021-10-18.xml*