Nociception assessment with videopupillometry in deeply sedated intensive care patients: Discriminative and criterion validations

• Published in: Australian critical care Vol. 37; no. 1; pp. 84 - 90
• Main Authors: Favre, Eva, Rahmaty, Zahra, Ben-Hamouda, Nawfel, Miroz, John-Paul, Abed-Maillard, Samia, Rusca, Marco, Oddo, Mauro, Ramelet, Anne-Sylvie
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Australia 01.01.2024
• Subjects: Critical Care; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Nociception; Pain Measurement - methods; Pupil - physiology; Reflex, Pupillary - physiology; Nociception; Automated pupillometry; Noxious; Critical care; Deep sedation; Pupil dilation; Mechanical ventilation
• ISSN: 1036-7314
• DOI: 10.1016/j.aucc.2023.07.038

Nociceptive assessment in deeply sedated patients is challenging. Validated instruments are lacking for this unresponsive population. Videopupillometry is a promising tool but has not been established in intensive care settings. To test the discriminate validity of pupillary dilation reflex (PDR) between non-noxious and noxious procedures for assessing nociception in non-neurological intensive care unit (ICU) patients and to test the criterion validity of pupil dilation using recommended PDR cut-off points to determine nociception. A single-centre prospective observational study was conducted in medical-surgical ICU patients. Two independent investigators performed videopupillometer measurements during a non-noxious and a noxious procedure, once a day (up to 7 days), when the patient remained deeply sedated (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score: -5 or -4). The non-noxious procedures consisted of a gentle touch on each shoulder and the noxious procedures were endotracheal suctioning or turning onto the side. Bivariable and multivariable general linear mixed models were used to account for multiple measurements in same patients. Sensitivity and specificity, and areas under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curve were calculated. Sixty patients were included, and 305 sets of 3 measurements (before, during, and after), were performed. PDR was higher during noxious procedures than before (mean difference between noxious and non-noxious procedures = 31.66%). After testing all variables of patient and stimulation characteristics in bivariable models, age and noxious procedures were kept in the multivariable model. Adjusting for age, noxious procedures (coefficient = -15.14 (95% confidence interval = -20.17 to -15.52, p < 0.001) remained the only predictive factor for higher pupil change. Testing recommended cut-offs, a PDR of >12% showed a sensitivity of 65%, and a specificity of 94% for nociception prediction, with an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.828 (95% confidence interval = 0.779-0.877). In conclusion, PDR is a potentially appropriate measure to assess nociception in deeply sedated ICU patients, and we suggest considering its utility in daily practices. This study was not preregistered in a clinical registry. Pupillometry may help clinicians to assess nociception in deeply sedated ICU patients.