-
Journal of Critical Care Dec 2020To compare non-pharmacological interventions in their ability to prevent delirium in critically ill patients, and find the optimal regimen for treatment.
OBJECTIVE
To compare non-pharmacological interventions in their ability to prevent delirium in critically ill patients, and find the optimal regimen for treatment.
METHODS
Literature searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases until the end of June 2019. We estimated the risk ratios (RRs) for the incidence of delirium and in-hospital mortality and found the mean difference (MD) for delirium duration and the length of ICU stay. The probabilities of interventions were ranked based on clinical outcomes. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020160757).
RESULTS
Twenty-six eligible studies were included in the network meta-analysis. Studies were grouped into seven intervention types: physical environment intervention (PEI), sedation reducing (SR), family participation (FP), exercise program (EP), cerebral hemodynamics improving (CHI), multi-component studies (MLT) and usual care (UC). In term of reducing the incidence of delirium, the two most effective interventions were FP (risk ratio (RR) 0.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08 to 0.44; surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) = 94%) and MLT (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.57; SUCRA = 68%) compared with observation. Although all interventions demonstrated nonsignificant efficacy in regards to delirium duration and the length of the patient's stay in the ICU, MLT (SUCRA = 78.6% and 71.2%, respectively) was found to be the most effective intervention strategy. In addition, EP (SUCRA = 97.2%) facilitated a significant reduction in hospital mortality, followed in efficacy by MLT (SUCRA = 73.2%), CHI (SUCRA = 35.8%), PEI (SUCRA = 34.8%), and SR (SUCRA = 31.8%).
CONCLUSIONS
Multi-component strategies are overall the optimal intervention techniques for preventing delirium and reducing ICU length of stay in critically ill patients by way of utilizing several interventions simultaneously. Additionally, family participation as a method of patient-centered care resulted in better outcomes for reducing the incidence of delirium.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Bayes Theorem; Critical Care; Critical Illness; Delirium; Family; Female; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Incidence; Intensive Care Units; Length of Stay; Male; Middle Aged; Network Meta-Analysis; Young Adult
PubMed: 32919363
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2020.08.019 -
Annals of the American Thoracic Society Apr 2021Physical restraints are used liberally in some intensive care units (ICUs) to prevent patient harm from device removal or falls. Although the intention of restraint use... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Physical restraints are used liberally in some intensive care units (ICUs) to prevent patient harm from device removal or falls. Although the intention of restraint use is patient safety, their application may inadvertently cause physical or psychological harm. Physical restraints may contribute to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but there is a paucity of supportive data. To investigate the association between physical restraint use and PTSD symptoms in ICU survivors. Secondary objectives were to examine the cognitive and physical outcomes associated with physical restraint use and to assess interventions that may be effective in reducing restraint use. A systematic review of English language studies in PubMed, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and CENTRAL between January 1, 1990, to February 8, 2020 was performed. Observational or randomized studies that reported on restraint use and associated outcomes, or interventions to reduce restraint use, in critically ill adult patients were identified. Two independent reviewers completed the review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. We identified 794 articles, of which 37 met inclusion criteria and were included. Thirty of these studies related to patient outcomes including PTSD, delirium, mechanical ventilation hours, and physical injury. Seven related to interventions to reduce physical restraint use. The quality of studies was not high; only four of the included studies were assessed to have a low risk of bias. Three studies found a significant relationship between restraint use and PTSD, but their results could not be pooled for analysis. Pooled data indicated a significant association between physical restraint use and delirium (odds ratio [OR], 11.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.66-20.01; < 0.001) and duration of mechanical ventilation (mean difference in days, 3.35; 95% CI, 1.95-4.75; < 0.001). We also found that interventions, such as nursing education, may effectively reduce restraint use by approximately 50% (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.32-0.73; < 0.001). The impact that a reduction in restraint use may have on associated outcomes was not examined. Physical restraint use may be associated with PTSD in ICU survivors and is associated with delirium and longer duration of mechanical ventilation. Nurse education is likely effective in reducing rates of physical restraint among ICU patients.
Topics: Adult; Critical Illness; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Restraint, Physical; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic; Survivors
PubMed: 33075240
DOI: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202006-738OC -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Delirium is an acute neuropsychological disorder that is common in hospitalised patients. It can be distressing to patients and carers and it is associated with serious... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Delirium is an acute neuropsychological disorder that is common in hospitalised patients. It can be distressing to patients and carers and it is associated with serious adverse outcomes. Treatment options for established delirium are limited and so prevention of delirium is desirable. Non-pharmacological interventions are thought to be important in delirium prevention. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions designed to prevent delirium in hospitalised patients outside intensive care units (ICU).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS, the specialised register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, with additional searches conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization Portal/ICTRP to 16 September 2020. There were no language or date restrictions applied to the electronic searches, and no methodological filters were used to restrict the search.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of single and multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions for preventing delirium in hospitalised adults cared for outside intensive care or high dependency settings. We only included non-pharmacological interventions which were designed and implemented to prevent delirium. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently examined titles and abstracts identified by the search for eligibility and extracted data from full-text articles. Any disagreements on eligibility and inclusion were resolved by consensus. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. The primary outcomes were: incidence of delirium; inpatient and later mortality; and new diagnosis of dementia. We included secondary and adverse outcomes as pre-specified in the review protocol. We used risk ratios (RRs) as measures of treatment effect for dichotomous outcomes and between-group mean differences for continuous outcomes. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. A complementary exploratory analysis was undertaker using a Bayesian component network meta-analysis fixed-effect model to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of the individual components of multicomponent interventions and describe which components were most strongly associated with reducing the incidence of delirium.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 22 RCTs that recruited a total of 5718 adult participants. Fourteen trials compared a multicomponent delirium prevention intervention with usual care. Two trials compared liberal and restrictive blood transfusion thresholds. The remaining six trials each investigated a different non-pharmacological intervention. Incidence of delirium was reported in all studies. Using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, we identified risks of bias in all included trials. All were at high risk of performance bias as participants and personnel were not blinded to the interventions. Nine trials were at high risk of detection bias due to lack of blinding of outcome assessors and three more were at unclear risk in this domain. Pooled data showed that multi-component non-pharmacological interventions probably reduce the incidence of delirium compared to usual care (10.5% incidence in the intervention group, compared to 18.4% in the control group, risk ratio (RR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 0.71, I = 39%; 14 studies; 3693 participants; moderate-certainty evidence, downgraded due to risk of bias). There may be little or no effect of multicomponent interventions on inpatient mortality compared to usual care (5.2% in the intervention group, compared to 4.5% in the control group, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.74, I = 15%; 10 studies; 2640 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to inconsistency and imprecision). No studies of multicomponent interventions reported data on new diagnoses of dementia. Multicomponent interventions may result in a small reduction of around a day in the duration of a delirium episode (mean difference (MD) -0.93, 95% CI -2.01 to 0.14 days, I = 65%; 351 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of multicomponent interventions on delirium severity (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49, 95% CI -1.13 to 0.14, I=64%; 147 participants; very low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and serious imprecision). Multicomponent interventions may result in a reduction in hospital length of stay compared to usual care (MD -1.30 days, 95% CI -2.56 to -0.04 days, I=91%; 3351 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and inconsistency), but little to no difference in new care home admission at the time of hospital discharge (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.07; 536 participants; low-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision). Reporting of other adverse outcomes was limited. Our exploratory component network meta-analysis found that re-orientation (including use of familiar objects), cognitive stimulation and sleep hygiene were associated with reduced risk of incident delirium. Attention to nutrition and hydration, oxygenation, medication review, assessment of mood and bowel and bladder care were probably associated with a reduction in incident delirium but estimates included the possibility of no benefit or harm. Reducing sensory deprivation, identification of infection, mobilisation and pain control all had summary estimates that suggested potential increases in delirium incidence, but the uncertainty in the estimates was substantial. Evidence from two trials suggests that use of a liberal transfusion threshold over a restrictive transfusion threshold probably results in little to no difference in incident delirium (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.36; I = 9%; 294 participants; moderate-certainty evidence downgraded due to risk of bias). Six other interventions were examined, but evidence for each was limited to single studies and we identified no evidence of delirium prevention. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate-certainty evidence regarding the benefit of multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions for the prevention of delirium in hospitalised adults, estimated to reduce incidence by 43% compared to usual care. We found no evidence of an effect on mortality. There is emerging evidence that these interventions may reduce hospital length of stay, with a trend towards reduced delirium duration, although the effect on delirium severity remains uncertain. Further research should focus on implementation and detailed analysis of the components of the interventions to support more effective, tailored practice recommendations.
Topics: Adult; Delirium; Hospitalization; Humans; Incidence; Inpatients; Medication Review
PubMed: 34826144
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013307.pub3 -
International Journal of Geriatric... Jan 2021Postoperative delirium (POD) is the most common complication in patients after hip fracture surgery, and the incidence of POD is associated with mortality and disability... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Postoperative delirium (POD) is the most common complication in patients after hip fracture surgery, and the incidence of POD is associated with mortality and disability in patients following hip fracture surgery. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the individual as well as anesthetic and operative risk factors associated with the POD in adult patients after hip fracture surgery.
METHODS
We searched relevant articles published to February 2020 in Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase. Studies involving adult patients who underwent hip fracture surgery were regarded as relevant if the studies contained the individual or anesthetic and surgical characteristics of participants. The pooled relative risk ratios (RRs) or weight mean difference of the variables were estimated by the Mantel-Haenszel or Inverse-Variance methods.
RESULTS
A total of 44 studies were included, which altogether included 104572 participants with hip fracture surgery (17703 patients with POD and 86869 patients without POD) and the incidence of POD was 16.93%. A total of 14 risk factors, classified into two categories which were individual as well as anesthetic and operative factors, were identified originally, which included age (weight mean difference [WMD]:2.33;95% confidential interval [CI]: 1.64-3.03), sex (RR: 0.89; 95% CI:0.85-0.93), American society of Anesthesiologists classification(RR:0.56; 95%CI:0.51-0.59), body mass index (WMD:-0.62; 95%CI:-0.81 to -0.44), function dependency(RR:1.52; 95% CI:1.24-1.87), visual impairment (RR:1.62; 95% CI: 1.16-2.27), smoking (RR:0.86; 95% CI:0.79-0.94), preoperative delirium (RR: 2.71; 95% CI: 2.50-2.72), dementia (RR:2.60; 95% CI:2.50-2.72), hypertension (RR: 1.10; 95% CI:1.04-1.15), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (RR:1.08; 95% CI: 1.01-1.16), regional anesthesia (RR:1.20; 95% CI: 1.01-1.43), transfusion (RR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.22-1.63), and elective surgery (RR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.84-0.99).
CONCLUSIONS
Patients possessed above risk factors might be high-risk patients. Clinician should maintain keen vigilance at those patients.
Topics: Blood Transfusion; Delirium; Hip Fractures; Humans; Incidence; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors
PubMed: 32833302
DOI: 10.1002/gps.5408 -
Anaesthesia Mar 2023The effects of dexmedetomidine in adults undergoing cardiac surgery are inconsistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyse the effects of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The effects of dexmedetomidine in adults undergoing cardiac surgery are inconsistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyse the effects of peri-operative dexmedetomidine in adults undergoing cardiac surgery. We searched MEDLINE via Pubmed, EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane for relevant randomised controlled trials between 1 January 1990 and 1 March 2022. We used the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology checklist to assess study quality and the GRADE approach to certainty of evidence. We assessed the sensitivity of results to false data. We used random-effects meta-analyses to analyse the primary outcomes: durations of intensive care and tracheal intubation. We included 48 trials of 6273 participants. Dexmedetomidine reduced the mean (95%CI) duration of intensive care by 5.0 (2.2-7.7) h, p = 0.001, and tracheal intubation by 1.6 (0.6-2.7) h, p = 0.003. The relative risk (95%CI) for postoperative delirium was 0.58 (0.43-0.78), p = 0.001; 0.76 (0.61-0.95) for atrial fibrillation, p = 0.015; and 0.49 (0.25-0.97) for short-term mortality, p = 0.041. Bradycardia and hypotension were not significantly affected. Trial sequential analysis was consistent with the primary meta-analysis. Adjustments for possible false data reduced the mean (95%CI) reduction in duration of intensive care and tracheal intubation by dexmedetomidine to 3.6 (1.8-5.4) h and 0.8 (0.2-1.4) h, respectively. Binary adjustment for methodological quality at a Joanna Briggs Institute score threshold of 10 did not alter the results significantly. In summary, peri-operative dexmedetomidine reduced the durations of intensive care and tracheal intubation and the incidence of short-term mortality after adult cardiac surgery. The reductions in intensive care stay and tracheal intubation may or may not be considered clinically useful, particularly after adjustment for possible false data.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Dexmedetomidine; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Emergence Delirium; Critical Care; Bradycardia
PubMed: 36535747
DOI: 10.1111/anae.15947 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Oct 2022Guidelines have recommended the use of dexmedetomidine or propofol for sedation after cardiac surgery, and propofol monotherapy for other patients. Further outcome data... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Outcomes of dexmedetomidine versus propofol sedation in critically ill adults requiring mechanical ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Guidelines have recommended the use of dexmedetomidine or propofol for sedation after cardiac surgery, and propofol monotherapy for other patients. Further outcome data are required for these drugs.
METHODS
This systematic review and meta-analysis was prospectively registered on PROSPERO. The primary outcome was ICU length of stay. Secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU delirium, all-cause mortality, and haemodynamic effects. Intensive care patients were analysed separately as cardiac surgical, medical/noncardiac surgical, those with sepsis, and patients in neurocritical care. Subgroup analyses based on age and dosage were conducted.
RESULTS
Forty-one trials (N=3948) were included. Dexmedetomidine did not significantly affect ICU length of stay across any ICU patient subtype when compared with propofol, but it reduced the duration of mechanical ventilation (mean difference -0.67 h; 95% confidence interval: -1.31 to -0.03 h; P=0.041; low certainty) and the risk of ICU delirium (risk ratio 0.49; 95% confidence interval: 0.29-0.87; P=0.019; high certainty) across cardiac surgical patients. Dexmedetomidine was also associated with a greater risk of bradycardia across a variety of ICU patients. Subgroup analyses revealed that age might affect the incidence of haemodynamic side-effects and mortality among cardiac surgical and medical/other surgical patients.
CONCLUSION
Dexmedetomidine did not significantly impact ICU length of stay compared with propofol, but it significantly reduced the duration of mechanical ventilation and the risk of delirium in cardiac surgical patients. It also significantly increased the risk of bradycardia across ICU patient subsets.
Topics: Adult; Bradycardia; Critical Illness; Delirium; Dexmedetomidine; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Intensive Care Units; Propofol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration, Artificial
PubMed: 35961815
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2022.06.020 -
JAMA Network Open Oct 2023Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common and serious complication after surgery. Various predisposing factors are associated with POD, but their magnitude and importance... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common and serious complication after surgery. Various predisposing factors are associated with POD, but their magnitude and importance using an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis have not been assessed.
OBJECTIVE
To identify perioperative factors associated with POD and assess their relative prognostic value among adults undergoing noncardiac surgery.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL from inception to May 2020.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies were included that (1) enrolled adult patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, (2) assessed perioperative risk factors for POD, and (3) measured the incidence of delirium (measured using a validated approach). Data were analyzed in 2020.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Individual patient data were pooled from 21 studies and 1-stage meta-analysis was performed using multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression after a multivariable imputation via chained equations model to impute missing data.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The end point of interest was POD diagnosed up to 10 days after a procedure. A wide range of perioperative risk factors was considered as potentially associated with POD.
RESULTS
A total of 192 studies met the eligibility criteria, and IPD were acquired from 21 studies that enrolled 8382 patients. Almost 1 in 5 patients developed POD (18%), and an increased risk of POD was associated with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status 4 (odds ratio [OR], 2.43; 95% CI, 1.42-4.14), older age (OR for 65-85 years, 2.67; 95% CI, 2.16-3.29; OR for >85 years, 6.24; 95% CI, 4.65-8.37), low body mass index (OR for body mass index <18.5, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.64-3.09), history of delirium (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.69-5.66), preoperative cognitive impairment (OR, 3.99; 95% CI, 2.94-5.43), and preoperative C-reactive protein levels (OR for 5-10 mg/dL, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.59-3.50; OR for >10 mg/dL, 3.56; 95% CI, 2.46-5.17). Completing a college degree or higher was associated with a decreased likelihood of developing POD (OR 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28-0.72).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data, several important factors associated with POD were found that may help identify patients at high risk and may have utility in clinical practice to inform patients and caregivers about the expected risk of developing delirium after surgery. Future studies should explore strategies to reduce delirium after surgery.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Emergence Delirium; Delirium; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors; Patients
PubMed: 37819663
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.37239 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2022Healthy sleep is an important component of childhood development. Changes in sleep architecture, including sleep stage composition, quantity, and quality from infancy to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Healthy sleep is an important component of childhood development. Changes in sleep architecture, including sleep stage composition, quantity, and quality from infancy to adolescence are a reflection of neurologic maturation. Hospital admission for acute illness introduces modifiable risk factors for sleep disruption that may negatively affect active brain development during a period of illness and recovery. Thus, it is important to examine non-pharmacologic interventions for sleep promotion in the pediatric inpatient setting.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effect of non-pharmacological sleep promotion interventions in hospitalized children and adolescents on sleep quality and sleep duration, child or parent satisfaction, cost-effectiveness, delirium incidence, length of mechanical ventilation, length of stay, and mortality.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, three other databases, and three trials registers to December 2021. We searched Google Scholar, and two websites, handsearched conference abstracts, and checked reference lists of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs, including cross-over trials, investigating the effects of any non-pharmacological sleep promotion intervention on the sleep quality or sleep duration (or both) of children aged 1 month to 18 years in the pediatric inpatient setting (intensive care unit [ICU] or general ward setting).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility, evaluated risk of bias, extracted and synthesized data, and used the GRADE approach to assess certainty of evidence. The primary outcomes were changes in both objective and subjective validated measures of sleep in children; secondary outcomes were child and parent satisfaction, cost-effectiveness ratios, delirium incidence or delirium-free days at time of hospital discharge, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and mortality.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 trials (528 participants; aged 3 to 22 years) in inpatient pediatric settings. Seven studies were conducted in the USA, two in Canada, and one in Brazil. Eight studies were funded by government, charity, or foundation grants. Two provided no information on funding. Eight studies investigated behavioral interventions (massage, touch therapy, and bedtime stories); two investigated physical activity interventions. Duration and timing of interventions varied widely. All studies were at high risk of performance bias due to the nature of the intervention, as participants, parents, and staff could not be masked to group assignment. We were unable to perform a quantitative synthesis due to substantial clinical heterogeneity. Behavioral interventions versus usual care Five studies (145 participants) provided low-certainty evidence of no clear difference between multicomponent relaxation interventions and usual care on objective sleep measures. Overall, evidence from single studies found no clear differences in daytime or nighttime sleep measures (33 participants); any sleep parameter (48 participants); or daytime or nighttime sleep or nighttime arousals (20 participants). One study (34 participants) reported no effect of massage on nighttime sleep, sleep efficiency (SE), wake after sleep onset (WASO), or total sleep time (TST) in adolescents with cancer. Evidence from a cross-over study in 10 children with burns suggested touch therapy may increase TST (391 minutes, interquartile range [IQR] 251 to 467 versus 331 minutes, IQR 268 to 373; P = 0.02); SE (76, IQR 53 to 90 versus 66, IQR 55 to 78; P = 0.04); and the number of rapid eye movement (REM) periods (4.5, IQR 2 to 5 versus 3.5, IQR 2 to 4; P = 0.03); but not WASO, sleep latency (SL), total duration of REM, or per cent of slow wave sleep. Four studies (232 participants) provided very low-certainty evidence on subjective measures of sleep. Evidence from single studies found that sleep efficiency may increase, and the percentage of nighttime wakefulness may decrease more over a five-day period following a massage than usual care (72 participants). One study (48 participants) reported an improvement in Children's Sleep Habits Questionnaire scores after discharge in children who received a multicomponent relaxation intervention compared to usual care. In another study, mean sleep duration per sleep episode was longer (23 minutes versus 15 minutes), and time to fall asleep was shorter (22 minutes versus 27 minutes) following a bedtime story versus no story (18 participants); and children listening to a parent-recorded story had longer SL than when a parent was present (mean 57.5 versus 43.5 minutes); both groups reported longer SL than groups who had a stranger-recorded story, and those who had no story and absent parents (94 participants; P < 0.001). In one study (34 participants), 87% (13/15) of participants felt they slept better following massage, with most parents (92%; 11/12) reporting they wanted their child to receive a massage again. Another study (20 participants) reported that parents thought the music, touch, and reading components of the intervention were acceptable, feasible, and had positive effects on their children (very low-certainty evidence). Physical activity interventions versus usual care One study (29 participants) found that an enhanced physical activity intervention may result in little or no improvement in TST or SE compared to usual care (low-certainty evidence). Another study (139 participants), comparing play versus no play found inconsistent results on subjective measures of sleep across different ages (TST was 49% higher for the no play groups in 4- to 7-year olds, 10% higher in 7- to 11-year olds, and 22% higher in 11- to 14-year olds). This study also found inconsistent results between boys and girls (girls in the first two age groups in the play group slept more than the no play group). No study evaluated child or parent satisfaction for behavioral interventions, or cost-effectiveness, delirium incidence or delirium-free days at hospital discharge, length of mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, or mortality for either behavioral or physical activity intervention.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The included studies were heterogeneous, so we could not quantitatively synthesize the results. Our narrative summary found inconsistent, low to very low-certainty evidence. Therefore, we are unable to determine how non-pharmacologic sleep promotion interventions affect sleep quality or sleep duration compared with usual care or other interventions. The evidence base should be strengthened through design and conduct of randomized trials, which use validated and highly reliable sleep assessment tools, including objective measures, such as polysomnography and actigraphy.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Child, Hospitalized; Delirium; Female; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Male; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration, Artificial; Sleep
PubMed: 35703367
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012908.pub2 -
Age and Ageing Jun 2023Postoperative delirium (POD) is a frequent complication in older adults, characterised by disturbances in attention, awareness and cognition, and associated with...
BACKGROUND
Postoperative delirium (POD) is a frequent complication in older adults, characterised by disturbances in attention, awareness and cognition, and associated with prolonged hospitalisation, poor functional recovery, cognitive decline, long-term dementia and increased mortality. Early identification of patients at risk of POD can considerably aid prevention.
METHODS
We have developed a preoperative POD risk prediction algorithm using data from eight studies identified during a systematic review and providing individual-level data. Ten-fold cross-validation was used for predictor selection and internal validation of the final penalised logistic regression model. The external validation used data from university hospitals in Switzerland and Germany.
RESULTS
Development included 2,250 surgical (excluding cardiac and intracranial) patients 60 years of age or older, 444 of whom developed POD. The final model included age, body mass index, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score, history of delirium, cognitive impairment, medications, optional C-reactive protein (CRP), surgical risk and whether the operation is a laparotomy/thoracotomy. At internal validation, the algorithm had an AUC of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.77-0.82) with CRP and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.77-0.82) without CRP. The external validation consisted of 359 patients, 87 of whom developed POD. The external validation yielded an AUC of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68-0.80).
CONCLUSIONS
The algorithm is named PIPRA (Pre-Interventional Preventive Risk Assessment), has European conformity (ce) certification, is available at http://pipra.ch/ and is accepted for clinical use. It can be used to optimise patient care and prioritise interventions for vulnerable patients and presents an effective way to implement POD prevention strategies in clinical practice.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Emergence Delirium; Delirium; Risk Factors; Postoperative Complications; Risk Assessment; C-Reactive Protein
PubMed: 37290122
DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afad086 -
Journal of Psychosomatic Research Jul 2023To assess the efficacy of melatonin and melatonergic agonist for the treatment of delirium in hospitalized patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy of melatonin and melatonergic agonist for the treatment of delirium in hospitalized patients.
METHODS
Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, CENTRAL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, TRIP Medical Database, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google were searched from inception to October 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies with any type of comparator evaluating melatonin or melatonergic agonist (ramelteon) enrolling any populations (ICU, surgery, geriatric) were included. Two reviewers independently selected and extracted data using the Cochrane risk of bias tools (RoB2 and ROBINSI).
RESULTS
Out of the 650 screened publications, three RCTs and six observational studies were included (n = 1211). All three RCTs compared melatonin to placebo, as the majority of observational studies compared melatonin or ramelteon to antipsychotics. Two RCTs reported the duration of delirium and a meta-analysis provided a statistical difference between melatonin and placebo (-1.72 days, 95% CI -2.66 to -0.77, p = 0.0004). Five observational studies reported the duration of delirium but only one reported a statistical reduction in the duration of delirium.
CONCLUSION
Although melatonin and ramelteon may be effective treatments for delirium, particularly to shorten the duration of delirium and to limit the use of rescue medication, current data is limited in number and in its quality. Clinicians should wait until higher quality data from ongoing RCTs are available before prescribing melatonin to delirious patients.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Melatonin; Delirium; Indenes; Antipsychotic Agents
PubMed: 37150157
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2023.111345