Person:

Rudolph, James

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether patients who developed delirium after cardiac surgery were at risk of functional decline.

DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.

SETTING: Two academic hospitals and a Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

PARTICIPANTS: One hundred ninety patients aged 60 and older undergoing elective or urgent cardiac surgery.

MEASUREMENTS: Delirium was assessed daily and was diagnosed according to the Confusion Assessment Method. Before surgery and 1 and 12 months postoperatively, patients were assessed for function using the instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scale. Functional decline was defined as a decrease in ability to perform one IADL at follow-up.

RESULTS: Delirium occurred in 43.1% (n=82) of the patients (mean age 73.7±6.7). Functional decline occurred in 36.3% (n=65/179) at 1 month and in 14.6% (n=26/178) at 12 months. Delirium was associated with greater risk of functional decline at 1 month (relative risk (RR)=1.9, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.3–2.8) and tended toward greater risk at 12 months (RR=1.9, 95% CI=0.9–3.8). After adjustment for age, cognition, comorbidity, and baseline function, delirium remained significantly associated with functional decline at 1 month (adjusted RR=1.8, 95% CI=1.2–2.6) but not at 12 months (adjusted RR=1.5, 95% CI=0.6–3.3).

CONCLUSION: Delirium was independently associated with functional decline at 1 month and had a trend toward association at 12 months. These findings provide justification for intervention trials to evaluate whether delirium prevention or treatment strategies might improve postoperative functional recovery.

OBJECTIVES: To use an expert consensus process to identify indicators of delirium features to help enhance bedside recognition of delirium. DESIGN: Modified Delphi consensus process to assign existing cognitive and delirium assessment items to delirium features in the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) diagnostic algorithm. SETTING: Meetings of expert panel. PARTICIPANTS: Panel of seven interdisciplinary clinical experts. MEASUREMENTS: Panelists' assignments of each assessment item to indicate CAM features. RESULTS: From an initial pool of 119 assessment items, the panel assigned 66 items to at least one CAM feature, and many items were assigned to more than one feature. Experts achieved a high level of consensus, with a postmeeting kappa for agreement of 0.98. The study staff compiled the assignment results to create a comprehensive list of CAM feature indicators, consisting of 107 patient interview questions, cognitive tasks, and interviewer observations, with some items assigned to multiple features. A subpanel shortened this list to 28 indicators of important delirium features. CONCLUSION: A systematic, well-described qualitative methodology was used to create a list of indicators for delirium based on the features of the CAM diagnostic algorithm. This indicator list may be useful as a clinical tool for enhancing delirium recognition at the bedside and for aiding in the development of a brief delirium screening instrument.