-
Minerva Anestesiologica Jun 2022Postoperative delirium is a frequent occurrence in the elderly surgical population. As a comprehensive list of predictive factors remains unknown, an opioid-sparing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Postoperative delirium is a frequent occurrence in the elderly surgical population. As a comprehensive list of predictive factors remains unknown, an opioid-sparing approach incorporating regional anesthesia techniques has been suggested to decrease its incidence. Due to the lack of conclusive evidence on the topic, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the potential impact of regional anesthesia and analgesia on postoperative delirium.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane central register of Controlled trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched for randomized trials comparing regional anesthesia or analgesia to systemic treatments in patients having any type of surgery. This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We pooled the results separately for each of these two applications by random effects modelling. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence and strength of conclusions.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Eighteen trials (3361 subjects) were included. Using regional techniques for surgical anesthesia failed to reduce the risk of postoperative delirium, with a relative risk (RR) of 1.21 (95% CI: 0.79 to 1.85); P=0.3800. In contrast, regional analgesia reduced the relative risk of perioperative delirium by a RR of 0.53 (95% CI: 0.42 to 0.68; P<0.0001), when compared to systemic analgesia. Post-hoc subgroup analysis for hip fracture surgery yielded similar findings.
CONCLUSIONS
These results show that postoperative delirium may be decreased when regional techniques are used in the postoperative period as an analgesic strategy. Intraoperative regional anesthesia alone may not decrease postoperative delirium since there are other factors that may influence this outcome.
Topics: Aged; Anesthesia, Conduction; Anesthesia, Local; Delirium; Hip Fractures; Humans
PubMed: 35164487
DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.22.16076-1 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Jun 2015To determine the relation between delirium in critically ill patients and their outcomes in the short term (in the intensive care unit and in hospital) and after... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To determine the relation between delirium in critically ill patients and their outcomes in the short term (in the intensive care unit and in hospital) and after discharge from hospital.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and PsychINFO, with no language restrictions, up to 1 January 2015.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTION STUDIES
Reports were eligible for inclusion if they were prospective observational cohorts or clinical trials of adults in intensive care units who were assessed with a validated delirium screening or rating system, and if the association was measured between delirium and at least one of four clinical endpoints (death during admission, length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and any outcome after hospital discharge). Studies were excluded if they primarily enrolled patients with a neurological disorder or patients admitted to intensive care after cardiac surgery or organ/tissue transplantation, or centered on sedation management or alcohol or substance withdrawal. Data were extracted on characteristics of studies, populations sampled, identification of delirium, and outcomes. Random effects models and meta-regression analyses were used to pool data from individual studies.
RESULTS
Delirium was identified in 5280 of 16,595 (31.8%) critically ill patients reported in 42 studies. When compared with control patients without delirium, patients with delirium had significantly higher mortality during admission (risk ratio 2.19, 94% confidence interval 1.78 to 2.70; P<0.001) as well as longer durations of mechanical ventilation and lengths of stay in the intensive care unit and in hospital (standard mean differences 1.79 (95% confidence interval 0.31 to 3.27; P<0.001), 1.38 (0.99 to 1.77; P<0.001), and 0.97 (0.61 to 1.33; P<0.001), respectively). Available studies indicated an association between delirium and cognitive impairment after discharge.
CONCLUSIONS
Nearly a third of patients admitted to an intensive care unit develop delirium, and these patients are at increased risk of dying during admission, longer stays in hospital, and cognitive impairment after discharge.
Topics: Adult; Cognition Disorders; Critical Care; Critical Illness; Delirium; Epidemiologic Methods; Female; Humans; Length of Stay; Male; Patient Discharge; Respiration, Artificial; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26041151
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.h2538 -
The American Journal of Geriatric... Oct 2018Delirium, defined as an acute disorder of attention and cognition with high morbidity and mortality, can be prevented by multicomponent nonpharmacological interventions.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Delirium, defined as an acute disorder of attention and cognition with high morbidity and mortality, can be prevented by multicomponent nonpharmacological interventions. The Hospital Elder Life Program (HELP) is the original evidence-based approach targeted to delirium risk factors, which has been widely disseminated.
OBJECTIVE
To summarize the current state of the evidence regarding HELP and to highlight its effectiveness and cost savings.
METHODS
Systematic review of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1999 to 2017, using a combination of controlled vocabulary and keyword terms.
RESULTS
Of the 44 final articles included, 14 were included in the meta-analysis for effectiveness and 30 were included for examining cost savings, adherence and adaptations, role of volunteers, successes and barriers, and issues in sustainability. The results for delirium incidence, falls, length of stay, and institutionalization were pooled for meta-analyses. Overall, 14 studies demonstrated significant reductions in delirium incidence (odds ratio [OR] 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-0.59). The rate of falls was reduced by 42% among intervention patients in three comparative studies (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.35-0.95). In nine studies on cost savings, the program saved $1600-$3800 (2018 U.S. dollars) per patient in hospital costs and over $16,000 (2018 U.S. dollars) per person-year in long-term care costs in the year following delirium. The systematic review revealed that programs were generally successful in adhering to or appropriately adapting HELP (n = 13 studies) and in finding the volunteer role to be valuable (n = 6 studies). Successes and barriers to implementation were examined in 6 studies, including ensuring effective clinician leadership, finding senior administrative champions, and shifting organizational culture. Sustainability factors were examined in 10 studies, including adapting to local circumstances, documenting positive impact and outcomes, and securing long-term funding.
CONCLUSION
The Hospital Elder Life Program is effective in reducing incidence of delirium and rate of falls, with a trend toward decreasing length of stay and preventing institutionalization. With ongoing efforts in continuous program improvement, implementation, adaptations, and sustainability, HELP has emerged as a reference standard model for improving the quality and effectiveness of hospital care for older persons worldwide.
Topics: Accidental Falls; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Delirium; Hospitalization; Humans; Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care; Program Development; Program Evaluation
PubMed: 30076080
DOI: 10.1016/j.jagp.2018.06.007 -
Journal of the American Medical... Oct 2022To critically appraise and quantify the performance studies by employing machine learning (ML) to predict delirium. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To critically appraise and quantify the performance studies by employing machine learning (ML) to predict delirium.
DESIGN
A systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS
Articles reporting the use of ML to predict delirium in adult patients were included. Studies were excluded if (1) the primary goal was only the identification of various risk factors for delirium; (2) the full-text article was not found; and (3) the article was published in a language other than English/Chinese.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library database, Web of Science, Grey literature, and other relevant databases for the related publications were searched (from inception to December 15, 2021). The data were extracted using a standard checklist, and the risk of bias was assessed through the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool. Meta-analysis with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity as effect measures, was performed with Metadisc software. Cochran Q and I statistics were used to assess the heterogeneity. Meta-regression was performed to determine the potential effect of adjustment for the key covariates.
RESULTS
A total of 22 studies were included. Only 4 of 22 studies were quantitatively analyzed. The studies varied widely in reporting about the study participants, features and selection, handling of missing data, sample size calculations, and the intended clinical application of the model. For ML models, the overall pooled area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for predicting delirium was 0.89, sensitivity 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.84‒0.85), and specificity 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.81-0.80).
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
We found that the ML model showed excellent performance in predicting delirium. This review highlights the potential shortcomings of the current approaches, including low comparability and reproducibility. Finally, we present the various recommendations on how these challenges can be effectively addressed before deploying these models in prospective analyses.
Topics: Adult; Delirium; Humans; Machine Learning; Prospective Studies; ROC Curve; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 35922015
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2022.06.020 -
Medicine Jun 2022The ABCDE (Awakening and Breathing Coordination of daily sedation and ventilator removal trials, Delirium monitoring and management, and Early mobility and exercise) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The ABCDE (Awakening and Breathing Coordination of daily sedation and ventilator removal trials, Delirium monitoring and management, and Early mobility and exercise) and ABCDEF (Assessment, prevent and manage pain, Both spontaneous awakening and spontaneous breathing trials, Choice of analgesia and sedation, assess, prevent and manage Delirium, Early mobility and exercise, Family engagement) care bundles consist of small sets of evidence-based interventions and are part of the science behind Intensive Care Unit (ICU) liberation. This review sought to analyse the process of implementation of ABCDE and ABCDEF care bundles in ICUs, identifying barriers, facilitators and changes in perception and attitudes of healthcare professionals; and to estimate care bundle effectiveness and safety.
METHODS
We selected qualitative and quantitative studies addressing the implementation of ABCDE and ABCDEF bundles in the ICU, identified on MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Epistemonikos, PsycINFO, Virtual Health Library and Open Grey, without restriction on language or date of publication, up to June 2018. The outcomes measured were ICU and hospital length of stay; mechanical ventilation time; incidence and prevalence of delirium or coma; level of agitation and sedation; early mobilization; mortality in ICU and hospital; change in perception, attitude or behaviour of the stakeholders; and change in knowledge of health professionals. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias and methodological quality. A meta-analysis of random effects was performed.
RESULTS
Twenty studies were included, 13 of which had a predominantly qualitative and 7 a quantitative design (31,604 participants). The implementation strategies were categorized according to the taxonomy developed by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group and eighty strategies were identified. The meta-analysis results showed that implementation of the bundles may reduce length of ICU stay, mechanical ventilation time, delirium, ICU and hospital mortality, and promoted early mobilization in critically-ill patients.
CONCLUSIONS
: This study can contribute to the planning and execution of the implementation process of ABCDE and ABCDEF care bundles in ICUs. However, the effectiveness and safety of these bundles need to be corroborated by further studies with greater methodological rigor.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42019121307.
Topics: Critical Care; Critical Illness; Delirium; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Patient Care Bundles
PubMed: 35758388
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000029499 -
International Journal of Nursing Studies Jan 2021Delirium is a critical and highly prevalent problem among critically ill patients. The Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) and the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Delirium is a critical and highly prevalent problem among critically ill patients. The Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) and the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) are the most recommended assessment tools for detecting intensive care unit (ICU) delirium.
OBJECTIVES
To synthesize the current evidence and compared the diagnostic accuracy of the two tools in the detection of delirium in adults in ICUs.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCE
A comprehensive search of the following electronic databases was performed using PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses A&I. The date range searched was from database inception to April 26, 2019.
REVIEW METHODS
Two researchers independently identified articles, systematically abstracted data and evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of the CAM-ICU or the ICDSC against standard references. Bivariate diagnostic statistical analysis with a random-effects model was performed to summarize the pooled sensitivity and specificity of the two tools.
RESULTS
In total, 29 CAM-ICU and 12 ICDSC studies were identified. The pooled sensitivity was 0.84 and 0.83 and pooled specificity was 0.95 and 0.87 for the CAM-ICU and the ICDSC, respectively. The CAM-ICU had higher summary specificity than the ICDSC did (p = 0.04). The percentage of hypoactive delirium, ICU type, use of mechanical ventilation, number of participants, and female percentage moderated the accuracy of the tools. Most of the domains of patient selection, index test, reference standards, and flow and timing were rated as having a low or unclear risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
Although both the CAM-ICU and the ICDSC are accurate assessment tools for screening delirium in critically ill patients, the CAM-ICU is superior in ruling out patients without ICU delirium and detecting delirium in patients in the medical ICU and those receiving mechanical ventilation. Further investigations are warranted to validate our findings. The study protocol is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42020133544).
Topics: Adult; Checklist; Critical Care; Critical Illness; Delirium; Female; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 33120134
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103782 -
Journal of the American Geriatrics... Jun 2022This systematic review was conducted to evaluate any interventions to prevent incident delirium, or shorten the duration of prevalent delirium, in older adults... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review was conducted to evaluate any interventions to prevent incident delirium, or shorten the duration of prevalent delirium, in older adults presenting to the emergency department (ED).
METHODS
Health sciences librarian designed electronic searches were conducted from database inception through September 2021. Two authors reviewed studies, and included studies that evaluated interventions for the prevention and/or treatment of delirium and excluded non-ED studies. The risk of bias (ROB) was evaluated by the Cochrane ROB tool or the Newcastle-Ottawa (NOS) scale. Meta-analysis was conducted to estimate a pooled effect of multifactorial programs on delirium prevention.
RESULTS
Our search strategy yielded 11,900 studies of which 10 met study inclusion criteria. Two RCTs evaluated pharmacologic interventions for delirium prevention; three non-RCTs employed a multi-factorial delirium prevention program; three non-RCTs evaluated regional anesthesia for hip fractures; and one study evaluated the use of Foley catheter, medication exposure, and risk of delirium. Only four studies demonstrated a significant impact on delirium incidence or duration of delirium-one RCT of melatonin reduced the incidence of delirium (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.62), one non-RCT study on a multi-factorial program decreased inpatient delirium prevalence (41% to 19%) and the other reduced incident delirium (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.61). One case-control study on the use of ED Foley catheters in the ED increased the duration of delirium (proportional OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.3 to 7.4). A pooled odds ratio for three multifactorial programs on delirium prevention was 0.46 (95% CI 0.31-0.68, I = 0).
CONCLUSION
Few interventions initiated in the ED were found to consistently reduce the incidence or duration of delirium. Delirium prevention and treatment trials in the ED are still rare and should be prioritized for future research.
Topics: Aged; Case-Control Studies; Delirium; Emergency Service, Hospital; Humans; Incidence; Inpatients
PubMed: 35274738
DOI: 10.1111/jgs.17740 -
Intensive Care Medicine Sep 2021To compare the effects of prevention interventions on delirium occurrence in critically ill adults. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To compare the effects of prevention interventions on delirium occurrence in critically ill adults.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Prospero, and WHO international clinical trial registry were searched from inception to April 8, 2021. Randomized controlled trials of pharmacological, sedation, non-pharmacological, and multi-component interventions enrolling adult critically ill patients were included. We performed conventional pairwise meta-analyses, NMA within Bayesian random effects modeling, and determined surface under the cumulative ranking curve values and mean rank. Reviewer pairs independently extracted data, assessed bias using Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and evidence certainty with GRADE. The primary outcome was delirium occurrence; secondary outcomes were durations of delirium and mechanical ventilation, length of stay, mortality, and adverse effects.
RESULTS
Eighty trials met eligibility criteria: 67.5% pharmacological, 31.3% non-pharmacological and 1.2% mixed pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. For delirium occurrence, 11 pharmacological interventions (38 trials, N = 11,993) connected to the evidence network. Compared to placebo, only dexmedetomidine (21/22 alpha agonist trials were dexmedetomidine) probably reduces delirium occurrence (odds ratio (OR) 0.43, 95% Credible Interval (CrI) 0.21-0.85; moderate certainty). Compared to benzodiazepines, dexmedetomidine (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.08-0.51; low certainty), sedation interruption (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.06-0.69; very low certainty), opioid plus benzodiazepine (OR 0.27, 95% CrI 0.10-0.76; very low certainty), and protocolized sedation (OR 0.27, 95% CrI 0.09-0.80; very low certainty) may reduce delirium occurrence but the evidence is very uncertain. Dexmedetomidine probably reduces ICU length of stay compared to placebo (Ratio of Means (RoM) 0.78, CrI 0.64-0.95; moderate certainty) and compared to antipsychotics (RoM 0.76, CrI 0.61-0.98; low certainty). Sedative interruption, protocolized sedation and opioids may reduce hospital length of stay compared to placebo, but the evidence is very uncertain. No intervention influenced mechanical ventilation duration, mortality, or arrhythmia. Single and multi-component non-pharmacological interventions did not connect to any evidence networks to allow for ranking and comparisons as planned; pairwise comparisons did not detect differences compared to standard care.
CONCLUSION
Compared to placebo and benzodiazepines, we found dexmedetomidine likely reduced the occurrence of delirium in critically ill adults. Compared to benzodiazepines, sedation-minimization strategies may also reduce delirium occurrence, but the evidence is uncertain.
Topics: Adult; Bayes Theorem; Critical Illness; Delirium; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration, Artificial
PubMed: 34379152
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-021-06490-3 -
Clinical Interventions in Aging 2019Vulnerable or "frail" patients are susceptible to the development of delirium when exposed to triggers such as surgical procedures. Once delirium occurs, interventions... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Vulnerable or "frail" patients are susceptible to the development of delirium when exposed to triggers such as surgical procedures. Once delirium occurs, interventions have little effect on severity or duration, emphasizing the importance of primary prevention. This review provides an overview of interventions to prevent postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing elective surgery. A literature search was conducted in March 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and before-and-after studies on interventions with potential effects on postoperative delirium in elderly surgical patients were included. Acute admission, planned ICU admission, and cardiac patients were excluded. Full texts were reviewed, and quality was assessed by two independent reviewers. Primary outcome was the incidence of delirium. Secondary outcomes were severity and duration of delirium. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for incidences of delirium where similar intervention techniques were used. Thirty-one RCTs and four before-and-after studies were included for analysis. In 19 studies, intervention decreased the incidences of postoperative delirium. Severity was reduced in three out of nine studies which reported severity of delirium. Duration was reduced in three out of six studies. Pooled analysis showed a significant reduction in delirium incidence for dexmedetomidine treatment, and bispectral index (BIS)-guided anaesthesia. Based on sensitivity analyses, by leaving out studies with a high risk of bias, multicomponent interventions and antipsychotics can also significantly reduce the incidence of delirium. Multicomponent interventions, the use of antipsychotics, BIS-guidance, and dexmedetomidine treatment can successfully reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing elective, non-cardiac surgery. However, present studies are heterogeneous, and high-quality studies are scarce. Future studies should add these preventive methods to already existing multimodal and multidisciplinary interventions to tackle as many precipitating factors as possible, starting in the pre-admission period.
Topics: Aged; Antipsychotic Agents; Delirium; Elective Surgical Procedures; Hospitalization; Humans; Incidence; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31354253
DOI: 10.2147/CIA.S201323 -
International Journal of Environmental... Aug 2021Delirium is a common neurobehavioral complication in hospitalized patients that can occur in the acute phase and lead to poor long-term outcomes. The purpose of this...
Delirium is a common neurobehavioral complication in hospitalized patients that can occur in the acute phase and lead to poor long-term outcomes. The purpose of this study was to identify non-pharmacological nursing interventions for the prevention and treatment of delirium in hospitalized adult patients. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize the findings of published studies. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library CENTRAL databases for randomized controlled trials in January 2021. We report this systematic review according to the PRISMA 2009 checklist. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021226538). Nine studies were systematically reviewed for non-pharmacological nursing interventions for the prevention and treatment of delirium. The types of non-pharmacological nursing interventions included multicomponent intervention, multidisciplinary care, multimedia education, music listening, mentoring of family caregivers concerning delirium management, bright light exposure, ear plugs, and interventions for simulated family presence using pre-recorded video messages. These results could help nurses select and utilize non-pharmacological nursing interventions for the prevention and treatment of delirium in clinical nursing practice.
Topics: Adult; Cognition; Delirium; Ear Protective Devices; Humans; Patients; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34444602
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18168853