Person:

Inouye, Sharon

Introduction: Delirium is a serious and prevalent problem in intensive care units (ICUs). The purpose of this study was to develop a research algorithm to enhance detection of delirium in critically ill ICU patients using chart review to complement a validated clinical delirium instrument. Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 178 patients aged 60 years and older who were admitted to the medical ICU. The Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) and a validated chart review method for detecting delirium were performed daily. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the chart-based delirium method using the CAM-ICU as the 'gold standard'. We then used an algorithm to detect delirium first using the CAM-ICU ratings and then chart review when the CAM-ICU was unavailable. Results: When using both the CAM-ICU and the chart-based review, the prevalence of delirium was found to be 80% of patients (143 out of 178) or 64% of patient-days (929 out of 1,457). Of these patient-days, 292 were classified as delirium by the CAM-ICU. The remainder (637 patient-days) were classified as delirium by the validated chart review method when CAM-ICU was missing because the assessment was conducted for weekends or holidays (404 patient-days), when CAM-ICU was not performed because of stupor or coma (205 patient-days), and when the CAM-ICU was negative (28 patient-days). Sensitivity of the chart-based method was 64% and specificity was 85%. Overall agreement between chart and the CAM-ICU was 72%. Conclusion: Eight out of 10 patients in this cohort study developed delirium in the ICU. Although use of a validated delirium instrument with frequent direct observations is recommended for clinical care, this approach may not always be feasible, especially in a research setting. The algorithm proposed here comprises a more comprehensive method for detecting delirium in a research setting, taking into account the fluctuation that occurs with delirium, which is a key component of accurate determination of delirium status. Improving detection of delirium is of paramount importance both to advance delirium research and to enhance clinical care and patient safety.

Background: Delirium (acute confusion), is a common, morbid, and costly complication of acute illness in older adults. Yet, researchers and clinicians lack short, efficient, and sensitive case identification tools for delirium. Though the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) is the most widely used algorithm for delirium, the existing assessments that operationalize the CAM algorithm may be too long or complicated for routine clinical use. Item response theory (IRT) models help facilitate the development of short screening tools for use in clinical applications or research studies. This study utilizes IRT to identify a reduced set of optimally performing screening indicators for the four CAM features of delirium. Methods: Older adults were screened for enrollment in a large scale delirium study conducted in Boston-area post-acute facilities (n = 4,598). Trained interviewers conducted a structured delirium assessment that culminated in rating the presence or absence of four features of delirium based on the CAM. A pool of 135 indicators from established cognitive testing and delirium assessment tools were assigned by an expert panel into two indicator sets per CAM feature representing (a) direct interview questions, including cognitive testing, and (b) interviewer observations. We used IRT models to identify the best items to screen for each feature of delirium. Results: We identified 10 dimensions and chose up to five indicators per dimension. Preference was given to items with peak psychometric information in the latent trait region relevant for screening for delirium. The final set of 48 indicators, derived from 39 items, maintains fidelity to clinical constructs of delirium and maximizes psychometric information relevant for screening. Conclusions: We identified optimal indicators from a large item pool to screen for delirium. The selected indicators maintain fidelity to clinical constructs of delirium while maximizing psychometric information important for screening. This reduced item set facilitates development of short screening tools suitable for use in clinical applications or research studies. This study represents the first step in the establishment of an item bank for delirium screening with potential questions for clinical researchers to select from and tailor according to their research objectives.

Background: The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual fifth edition (DSM-5) provides new criteria for delirium diagnosis. We examined delirium diagnosis using these new criteria compared with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual fourth edition (DSM-IV) in a large dataset of patients assessed for delirium and related presentations. Methods: Patient data (n = 768) from six prospectively collected cohorts, clinically assessed using DSM-IV and the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R98), were pooled. Post hoc application of DRS-R98 item scores were used to rate DSM-5 criteria. ‘Strict’ and ‘relaxed’ DSM-5 criteria to ascertain delirium were compared to rates determined by DSM-IV. Results: Using DSM-IV by clinical assessment, delirium was found in 510/768 patients (66%). Strict DSM-5 criteria categorized 158 as delirious including 155 (30%) with DSM-IV delirium, whereas relaxed DSM-5 criteria identified 466 as delirious, including 455 (89%) diagnosed by DSM-IV (P <0.001). The concordance between the different diagnostic methods was: 53% (ĸ = 0.22) between DSM-IV and the strict DSM-5, 91% (ĸ = 0.82) between the DSM-IV and relaxed DSM-5 criteria and 60% (ĸ = 0.29) between the strict versus relaxed DSM-5 criteria. Only 155 cases were identified as delirium by all three approaches. The 55 (11%) patients with DSM-IV delirium who were not rated as delirious by relaxed criteria had lower mean DRS-R98 total scores than those rated as delirious (13.7 ± 3.9 versus 23.7 ± 6.0; P <0.001). Conversely, mean DRS-R98 score (21.1 ± 6.4) for the 70% not rated as delirious by strict DSM-5 criteria was consistent with suggested cutoff scores for full syndromal delirium. Only 11 cases met DSM-5 criteria that were not deemed to have DSM-IV delirium. Conclusions: The concordance between DSM-IV and the new DSM-5 delirium criteria varies considerably depending on the interpretation of criteria. Overly-strict adherence for some new text details in DSM-5 criteria would reduce the number of delirium cases diagnosed; however, a more ‘relaxed’ approach renders DSM-5 criteria comparable to DSM-IV with minimal impact on their actual application and is thus recommended.

Background: Difficulties with performance of functional activities may result from cognitive and/or physical impairments. To date, there has not been a clear delineation of the physical and cognitive demands of activities of daily living. Objectives: To quantify the relative physical and cognitive demands required to complete typical functional activities in older adults. Design: Expert panel survey. Setting: Web-based platform. Participants: Eleven experts from eight academic medical centers and 300 community dwelling elderly adults age 70 and older scheduled for elective non-cardiac surgery from two academic medical centers. Methods: Sum scores of expert ratings were calculated and then validated against objective data collected from a prospective longitudinal study. Main Outcome Measurements Correlation between expert ratings and objective neuropsychological tests (memory, language, complex attention) and physical measures (gait speed and grip strength) for performance-based tasks. Results: Managing money, self-administering medications, using the telephone, and preparing meals were rated as requiring significantly more cognitive demand, while walking and transferring, moderately strenuous activities, and climbing stairs were assessed as more physically demanding. Largely cognitive activities correlated with objective neuropsychological performance (r=0.13–0.23, p<.05) and largely physical activities correlated with physical performance (r=0.15–0.46, p<.05). Conclusions: Quantifying the degree of cognitive and/or physical demand for completing a specific task adds an additional dimension to standard measures of functional assessment. This additional information may significantly influence decisions about rehabilitation, post-acute care needs, treatment plans, and caregiver education.

Background: Delirium is a common complication for older people in hospital. Evidence suggests that delirium incidence in hospital may be reduced by about a third through a multi-component intervention targeted at known modifiable risk factors. We describe the research design and conceptual framework underpinning it that informed the development of a novel delirium prevention system of care for acute hospital wards. Particular focus of the study was on developing an implementation process aimed at embedding practice change within routine care delivery. Methods: We adopted a participatory action research approach involving staff, volunteers, and patient and carer representatives in three northern NHS Trusts in England. We employed Normalization Process Theory to explore knowledge and ward practices on delirium and delirium prevention. We established a Development Team in each Trust comprising senior and frontline staff from selected wards, and others with a potential role or interest in delirium prevention. Data collection included facilitated workshops, relevant documents/records, qualitative one-to-one interviews and focus groups with multiple stakeholders and observation of ward practices. We used grounded theory strategies in analysing and synthesising data. Results: Awareness of delirium was variable among staff with no attention on delirium prevention at any level; delirium prevention was typically neither understood nor perceived as meaningful. The busy, chaotic and challenging ward life rhythm focused primarily on diagnostics, clinical observations and treatment. Ward practices pertinent to delirium prevention were undertaken inconsistently. Staff welcomed the possibility of volunteers being engaged in delirium prevention work, but existing systems for volunteer support were viewed as a barrier. Our evolving conception of an integrated model of delirium prevention presented major implementation challenges flowing from minimal understanding of delirium prevention and securing engagement of volunteers alongside practice change. The resulting Prevention of Delirium (POD) Programme combines a multi-component delirium prevention and implementation process, incorporating systems and mechanisms to introduce and embed delirium prevention into routine ward practices. Conclusions: Although our substantive interest was in delirium prevention, the conceptual and methodological strategies pursued have implications for implementing and sustaining practice and service improvements more broadly. Study registration ISRCTN65924234

Introduction: Postoperative delirium is one of the most common complications of major surgery, affecting 10–70% of surgical patients 60 years and older. Delirium is an acute change in cognition that manifests as poor attention and illogical thinking and is associated with longer intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stay, long-lasting cognitive deterioration and increased mortality. Ketamine has been used as an anaesthetic drug for over 50 years and has an established safety record. Recent research suggests that, in addition to preventing acute postoperative pain, a subanaesthetic dose of intraoperative ketamine could decrease the incidence of postoperative delirium as well as other neurological and psychiatric outcomes. However, these proposed benefits of ketamine have not been tested in a large clinical trial. Methods: The Prevention of Delirium and Complications Associated with Surgical Treatments (PODCAST) study is an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. 600 cardiac and major non-cardiac surgery patients will be randomised to receive ketamine (0.5 or 1 mg/kg) or placebo following anaesthetic induction and prior to surgical incision. For the primary outcome, blinded observers will assess delirium on the day of surgery (postoperative day 0) and twice daily from postoperative days 1–3 using the Confusion Assessment Method or the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU. For the secondary outcomes, blinded observers will estimate pain using the Behavioral Pain Scale or the Behavioral Pain Scale for Non-Intubated Patients and patient self-report. Ethics and dissemination The PODCAST trial has been approved by the ethics boards of five participating institutions; approval is ongoing at other sites. Recruitment began in February 2014 and will continue until the end of 2016. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications, stakeholder engagement and popular media. Registration details The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01690988 (last updated March 2014). The PODCAST trial is being conducted under the auspices of the Neurological Outcomes Network for Surgery (NEURONS). Trial registration number NCT01690988 (last updated December 2013).

Geriatricians have embraced the term “geriatric syndrome,” using it extensively to highlight the unique features of common health conditions in older people. Geriatric syndromes, such as delirium, falls, incontinence, and frailty, are highly prevalent, multifactorial, and associated with substantial morbidity and poor outcomes. Nevertheless, this central geriatric concept has remained poorly defined. This article reviews criteria for defining geriatric syndromes and proposes a balanced approach of developing preliminary criteria based on peer-reviewed evidence. Based on a review of the literature, four shared risk factors—older age, baseline cognitive impairment, baseline functional impairment, and impaired mobility—were identified across five common geriatric syndromes (pressure ulcers, incontinence, falls, functional decline, and delirium). Understanding basic mechanisms involved in geriatric syndromes will be critical to advancing research and developing targeted therapeutic options, although given the complexity of these multifactorial conditions, attempts to define relevant mechanisms will need to incorporate more-complex models, including a focus on synergistic interactions between different risk factors. Finally, major barriers have been identified in translating research advances, such as preventive strategies of proven effectiveness for delirium and falls, into clinical practice and policy initiatives. National strategic initiatives are required to overcome barriers and to achieve clinical, research, and policy advances that will improve quality of life for older persons.

Background Delirium is a highly prevalent disorder among older patients in the intensive care unit.

Methods We performed a prospective cohort study of 304 patients 60 years or older admitted from September 5, 2002, through September 30, 2004, to a 14-bed ICU in an urban university teaching hospital. The main outcome measure was ICU delirium that developed within 48 hours of ICU admission. Patients were assessed for delirium with the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU and medical record review. Risk factors for delirium were assessed on ICU admission by interview with proxies and medical record review. A model was developed using multivariate logistic regression and internally validated with bootstrapping methods.

Results Delirium occurred in 214 study participants (70.4%) within the first 48 hours of ICU admission. In a multivariate regression model, 4 admission risk factors for delirium were identified. These risk factors included dementia (odds ratio [OR], 6.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9-13.8), receipt of benzodiazepines before ICU admission (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.6-7.0), elevated creatinine level (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1-4.0), and low arterial pH (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1-3.9). The C statistic was 0.78.

Conclusions Delirium is frequent among older ICU patients. Admission characteristics can be important markers for delirium in these patients. Knowledge of these admission risk factors can prompt early correction of metabolic abnormalities and may subsequently reduce delirium duration.

Background: Delirium, a common complication of advanced cancer, may put caregivers at risk for poor mental health outcomes. We looked for a relationship between caregiver-perceived delirium in a patient with advanced cancer and rates of caregiver psychiatric disorders.

Methods: Using cross-sectional data from 200 caregivers of patients with cancer with a life expectancy of less than 6 months, we determined the frequency of caregiver-perceived delirium, which was defined as caregivers who reported witnessing the patient “confused, delirious” on the Stressful Caregiving Response to Experiences of Dying (SCARED) weekly or more often. We tested for associations between caregiver-reported delirium and presence of caregiver mental disorders, using the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-IV to diagnose mental disorders and caregiver burden, as measured by the caregiver burden scale (CBS).

Results: Of the 200 caregivers who completed the SCARED, 38 (19.0%) reported seeing the patient “confused, delirious” at least once per week in the month prior to study enrollment and 7 (3.5%) met criteria for generalized anxiety (GA). Caregivers of patients with caregiver-perceived delirium were 12 times more likely to have GA (odds ratio [OR] 12.12; p < 0.01). The relationship between caregiver-perceived delirium and caregiver GA persisted after adjusting for caregiver burden and exposure to other stressful patient experiences (OR = 9.99; p = 0.04).

Conclusions: This is the first report of an association between caregiver-perceived delirium and a caregiver mental health outcome. Further studies, using improved measures of delirium, are needed.