Implementation of a delirium assessment tool in the ICU can influence haloperidol use.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
In critically ill patients, delirium is a serious and frequent disorder that is associated with a prolonged intensive care and hospital stay and an increased morbidity and mortality. Without the use of a delirium screening instrument, delirium is often missed by ICU nurses and physicians. The effects of implementation of a screening method on haloperidol use is not known. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of the confusion assessment method-ICU (CAM-ICU) and the effect of its use on frequency and duration of haloperidol use.Methods
We used a tailored implementation strategy focused on potential barriers. We measured CAM-ICU compliance, interrater reliability, and delirium knowledge, and compared the haloperidol use, as a proxy for delirium incidence, before and after the implementation of the CAM-ICU.Results
Compliance and delirium knowledge increased from 77% to 92% and from 6.2 to 7.4, respectively (both, P < 0.0001). The interrater reliability increased from 0.78 to 0.89. More patients were treated with haloperidol (9.9% to 14.8%, P < 0.001), however with a lower dose (18 to 6 mg, P = 0.01) and for a shorter time period (5 [IQR:2-9] to 3 [IQR:1-5] days, P = 0.02).Conclusions
With a tailored implementation strategy, a delirium assessment tool was successfully introduced in the ICU with the main goals achieved within four months. Early detection of delirium in critically ill patients increases the number of patients that receive treatment with haloperidol, however with a lower dose and for a shorter time period.
SUBMITTER: van den Boogaard M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2750188 | biostudies-literature | 2009
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Implementation of a delirium assessment tool in the ICU can influence haloperidol use.
van den Boogaard Mark M Pickkers Peter P van der Hoeven Hans H Roodbol Gabriel G van Achterberg Theo T Schoonhoven Lisette L
Critical care (London, England) 20090810 4
<h4>Introduction</h4>In critically ill patients, delirium is a serious and frequent disorder that is associated with a prolonged intensive care and hospital stay and an increased morbidity and mortality. Without the use of a delirium screening instrument, delirium is often missed by ICU nurses and physicians. The effects of implementation of a screening method on haloperidol use is not known. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of the confusion assessment method-ICU (CAM ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Delirium severity is independently associated with longer hospital stays, nursing home placement, and death in patients outside the ICU. Delirium severity in the ICU is not routinely measured because the available instruments are difficult to complete in critically ill patients. We designed our study to assess the reliability and validity of a new ICU delirium severity tool, the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU-7 delirium severity scale. DESIGN:Observational cohort study. SETTING:Medical, surgical, and progressive ICUs of three academic hospitals. PATIENTS:Five hundred eighteen adult (? 18 yr) patients. INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:Patients received the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU, Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, and Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 assessments. A 7-point scale (0-7) was derived from responses to the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale items. Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU-7 showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's ? = 0.85) and good correlation with Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 scores (correlation coefficient = 0.64). Known-groups validity was supported by the separation of mechanically ventilated and nonventilated assessments. Median Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU-7 scores demonstrated good predictive validity with higher odds (odds ratio = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.30-1.66) of in-hospital mortality and lower odds (odds ratio = 0.8; 95% CI = 0.72-0.9) of being discharged home after adjusting for age, race, gender, severity of illness, and chronic comorbidities. Higher Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU-7 scores were also associated with increased length of ICU stay (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Our results suggest that Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU-7 is a valid and reliable delirium severity measure among ICU patients. Further research comparing it to other delirium severity measures, its use in delirium efficacy trials, and real-life implementation is needed to determine its role in research and clinical practice.
| S-EPMC5392153 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To compare the efficacy and safety of scheduled low-dose haloperidol versus placebo for the prevention of delirium (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist ? 4) administered to critically ill adults with subsyndromal delirium (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist = 1-3).Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.Three 10-bed ICUs (two medical and one surgical) at an academic medical center in the United States.Sixty-eight mechanically ventilated patients with subsyndromal delirium without complicating neurologic conditions, cardiac surgery, or requiring deep sedation.Patients were randomly assigned to receive IV haloperidol 1 mg or placebo every 6 hours until delirium occurred (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist ? 4 with psychiatric confirmation), 10 days of therapy had elapsed, or ICU discharge.Baseline characteristics were similar between the haloperidol (n = 34) and placebo (n = 34) groups. A similar number of patients given haloperidol (12/34 [35%]) and placebo (8/34 [23%]) developed delirium (p = 0.29). Haloperidol use reduced the hours per study day spent agitated (Sedation Agitation Scale ? 5) (p = 0.008), but it did not influence the proportion of 12-hour ICU shifts patients spent alive without coma (Sedation Agitation Scale ? 2) or delirium (p = 0.36), the time to first delirium occurrence (p = 0.22), nor delirium duration (p = 0.26). Days of mechanical ventilation (p = 0.80), ICU mortality (p = 0.55), and ICU patient disposition (p = 0.22) were similar in the two groups. The proportion of patients who developed corrected QT-interval prolongation (p = 0.16), extrapyramidal symptoms (p = 0.31), excessive sedation (p = 0.31), or new-onset hypotension (p = 1.0) that resulted in study drug discontinuation was comparable between the two groups.Low-dose scheduled haloperidol, initiated early in the ICU stay, does not prevent delirium and has little therapeutic advantage in mechanically ventilated, critically ill adults with subsyndromal delirium.
| S-EPMC4779647 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDelirium is a frequent disorder in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with serious consequences. Therefore, preventive treatment for delirium may be beneficial. Worldwide, haloperidol is the first choice for pharmacological treatment of delirious patients. In daily clinical practice, a lower dose is sometimes used as prophylaxis. Some studies have shown the beneficial effects of prophylactic haloperidol on delirium incidence as well as on mortality, but evidence for effectiveness in ICU patients is limited. The primary objective of our study is to determine the effect of haloperidol prophylaxis on 28-day survival. Secondary objectives include the incidence of delirium and delirium-related outcome and the side effects of haloperidol prophylaxis.MethodsThis will be a multicenter three-armed randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, prophylactic intervention study in critically ill patients. We will include consecutive non-neurological ICU patients, aged ≥ 18 years with an expected ICU length of stay >1 day. To be able to demonstrate a 15% increase in 28-day survival time with a power of 80% and alpha of 0.05 in both intervention groups, a total of 2,145 patients will be randomized; 715 in each group. The anticipated mortality rate in the placebo group is 12%. The intervention groups will receive prophylactic treatment with intravenous haloperidol 1 mg/q8h or 2 mg/q8h, and patients in the control group will receive placebo (sodium chloride 0.9%), both for a maximum period of 28-days. In patients who develop delirium, study medication will be stopped and patients will subsequently receive open label treatment with a higher (therapeutic) dose of haloperidol. We will use descriptive summary statistics as well as Cox proportional hazard regression analyses, adjusted for covariates.DiscussionThis will be the first large-scale multicenter randomized controlled prevention study with haloperidol in ICU patients with a high risk of delirium, adequately powered to demonstrate an effect on 28-day survival.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov: NCT01785290.EudraCT number: 2012-004012-66.
| S-EPMC4222562 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo adapt and validate a chart-based delirium detection tool for use in critically ill adults.DesignValidation study.SettingMedical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) in an academic hospital.MeasurementsA chart-based delirium detection tool (CHART-DEL) was adapted for use in critically ill adults (CHART-DEL-ICU) and compared with prospective delirium assessments (i.e., clinical assessments (reference standard) by a research nurse trained by a neuropsychiatrist and routine delirium screening tools Confusion Assessment Method (CAM-ICU)) and (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC)). The original CHART-DEL tool was adapted to include physician-reported ICDSC score (for probable delirium) and Richmond-Agitation Sedation Scale score (for altered level of consciousness and agitation). Two trained chart abstractors blinded to all delirium assessments manually abstracted delirium-related information from medical charts and electronic medical records and rated if delirium was present (four levels: uncertain, possible, probable, definite) or absent (no evidence).ResultsCharts were manually abstracted for delirium-related information for 213 patients who were included in a prospective cohort study that included prospective delirium assessments. The CHART-DEL-ICU tool had excellent interrater reliability (kappa = 0.90). Compared to the reference standard, the sensitivity was 66.0% (95% CI = 59.3-72.3%) and specificity was 82.1% (95% CI = 78.0-85.7%), with a cut-point that included definite, probable, possible, and uncertain delirium. The AUC of the CHART-DEL-ICU alone is 74.1% (95% CI = 70.4-77.8%) compared with the addition of the CAM-ICU and ICDSC (CAM-ICU/CHART-DEL-ICU: 80.9% (95% CI = 77.8-83.9%), P = .01; ICDSC/CHART-DEL-ICU: 79.2% (95% CI = 75.9-82.6%), P = .03).ConclusionA chart-based delirium detection tool has improved diagnostic accuracy when combined with routine delirium screening tools (CAM-ICU and ICDSC), compared to a chart-based method on its own. This presents a potential for retrospective detection of delirium from medical charts for research or to augment routine delirium screening methods to find missed cases of delirium.
| S-EPMC8049975 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are conflicting data on the effects of antipsychotic medications on delirium in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU).MethodsIn a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned patients with acute respiratory failure or shock and hypoactive or hyperactive delirium to receive intravenous boluses of haloperidol (maximum dose, 20 mg daily), ziprasidone (maximum dose, 40 mg daily), or placebo. The volume and dose of a trial drug or placebo was halved or doubled at 12-hour intervals on the basis of the presence or absence of delirium, as detected with the use of the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU, and of side effects of the intervention. The primary end point was the number of days alive without delirium or coma during the 14-day intervention period. Secondary end points included 30-day and 90-day survival, time to freedom from mechanical ventilation, and time to ICU and hospital discharge. Safety end points included extrapyramidal symptoms and excessive sedation.ResultsWritten informed consent was obtained from 1183 patients or their authorized representatives. Delirium developed in 566 patients (48%), of whom 89% had hypoactive delirium and 11% had hyperactive delirium. Of the 566 patients, 184 were randomly assigned to receive placebo, 192 to receive haloperidol, and 190 to receive ziprasidone. The median duration of exposure to a trial drug or placebo was 4 days (interquartile range, 3 to 7). The median number of days alive without delirium or coma was 8.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.6 to 9.9) in the placebo group, 7.9 (95% CI, 4.4 to 9.6) in the haloperidol group, and 8.7 (95% CI, 5.9 to 10.0) in the ziprasidone group (P=0.26 for overall effect across trial groups). The use of haloperidol or ziprasidone, as compared with placebo, had no significant effect on the primary end point (odds ratios, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.64 to 1.21] and 1.04 [95% CI, 0.73 to 1.48], respectively). There were no significant between-group differences with respect to the secondary end points or the frequency of extrapyramidal symptoms.ConclusionsThe use of haloperidol or ziprasidone, as compared with placebo, in patients with acute respiratory failure or shock and hypoactive or hyperactive delirium in the ICU did not significantly alter the duration of delirium. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and the VA Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center; MIND-USA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01211522 .).
| S-EPMC6364999 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImplementation science comprises a large set of theories suggesting interacting factors at different organisational levels. Development of literature syntheses and frameworks for implementation have contributed to comprehensive descriptions of implementation. However, corresponding instruments for measuring these comprehensive descriptions are currently lacking. The present study aimed to develop an instrument measuring care providers' perceptions of an implementation effort, and to explore the instrument's psychometric properties.MethodsBased on existing implementation literature, a questionnaire was designed with items on individual and team factors and on stages of change in an implementation process. The instrument was tested in a Norwegian study on implementation of evidence based practices for psychosis. Item analysis, factor structure, and internal consistency at baseline were examined.ResultsThe 27-item Implementation Process Assessment Tool (IPAT) revealed large variation between mean score of the items. The total scale scores were widely dispersed across respondents. Internal consistency for the total scale was high (Cronbach's alpha: .962), and all but one item contributed positively to the construct. The results indicated four underlying constructs: individual stages for behavioural change, individual activities and perceived support, collective readiness and support, and individual perceptions of the intervention.ConclusionsThe IPAT appears to be a feasible instrument for investigating the implementation process from the perspective of those making the change. It can enable examination of the relative importance of factors thought to be essential for implementation outcomes. It may also provide ongoing feedback for leaders tailoring support for teams to improve implementation. However, further research is needed to detect the instrument's properties later in the implementation process and in different contexts.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov code NCT03271242 (retrospective registered September 5, 2017).
| S-EPMC6805659 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe applied the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM)-Intensive Care Unit (ICU)-7 delirium scale to patients who underwent liver transplant (LT).MethodsRetrospective cohort including patients who underwent LT for cirrhosis admitted to the ICU from June 2013 to June 2016 at the University of Alberta Hospital, Canada. Delirium was assessed using the CAM-ICU-7 scale (0-7 points) twice daily on days one and 3 post LT, with the highest score being considered. Primary endpoint was hospital mortality.ResultsAmong all patients, 101/150 (67.3%) were men and mean age was 52.4 (SD 11.8) years. On days 1 and 3 post LT, mean CAM-ICU-7 scores were 1.8 (SD 1.3) and 1.6 (SD 1.8), respectively. Therefore, on days 1 and 3 post LT, 38/150 (25.3%) and 26/95 (27.4%) patients had delirium. While delirium on day 3 post LT was associated with higher hospital mortality (11.5% versus 0%; p = 0.019), it was not associated with length-of-hospital stay (29.2 versus 34.4 days; p = 0.36). Following adjustment for APACHEII score, delirium on day 3 post LT was associated with higher odds of hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.89 [95% CI 1.02-3.50]). Following adjustment for Glasgow Coma Scale and mechanical ventilation, serum creatinine was associated with higher odds of delirium on day 3 post LT (aOR 2.02 [95% CI 1.08-3.77]).ConclusionsUsing the CAM-ICU-7 scale, delirium was diagnosed in a fourth of patients who underwent LT. Delirium on day 3 post LT was associated with higher odds of hospital mortality.
| S-EPMC10370723 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesBoth delirium duration and delirium severity are associated with adverse patient outcomes. Serum biomarkers associated with delirium duration and delirium severity in ICU patients have not been reliably identified. We conducted our study to identify peripheral biomarkers representing systemic inflammation, impaired neuroprotection, and astrocyte activation associated with delirium duration, delirium severity, and in-hospital mortality.DesignObservational study.SettingThree Indianapolis hospitals.PatientsThree-hundred twenty-one critically ill delirious patients.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsWe analyzed the associations between biomarkers collected at delirium onset and delirium-/coma-free days assessed through Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale/Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU, delirium severity assessed through Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU-7, and in-hospital mortality. After adjusting for age, gender, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, Charlson comorbidity score, sepsis diagnosis and study intervention group, interleukin-6, -8, and -10, tumor necrosis factor-α, C-reactive protein, and S-100β levels in quartile 4 were negatively associated with delirium-/coma-free days by 1 week and 30 days post enrollment. Insulin-like growth factor-1 levels in quartile 4 were not associated with delirium-/coma-free days at both time points. Interleukin-6, -8, and -10, tumor necrosis factor-α, C-reactive protein, and S-100β levels in quartile 4 were also associated with delirium severity by 1 week. At hospital discharge, interleukin-6, -8, and -10 retained the association but tumor necrosis factor-α, C-reactive protein, and S-100β lost their associations with delirium severity. Insulin-like growth factor-1 levels in quartile 4 were not associated with delirium severity at both time points. Interleukin-8 and S-100β levels in quartile 4 were also associated with higher in-hospital mortality. Interleukin-6 and -10, tumor necrosis factor-α, and insulin-like growth factor-1 were not found to be associated with in-hospital mortality.ConclusionsBiomarkers of systemic inflammation and those for astrocyte and glial activation were associated with longer delirium duration, higher delirium severity, and in-hospital mortality. Utility of these biomarkers early in delirium onset to identify patients at a higher risk of severe and prolonged delirium, and delirium related complications during hospitalization needs to be explored in future studies.
| S-EPMC7242000 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveSummarize performance and development of ICU delirium-prediction models published within the past 5 years.Data sourcesSystematic electronic searches were conducted in April 2019 using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature to identify peer-reviewed studies.Study selectionEligible studies were published in English during the past 5 years that specifically addressed the development, validation, or recalibration of delirium-prediction models in adult ICU populations.Data extractionScreened citations were extracted independently by three investigators with a 42% overlap to verify consistency using the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies.Data synthesisEighteen studies featuring 23 distinct prediction models were included. Model performance varied greatly, as assessed by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.62-0.94), specificity (0.50-0.97), and sensitivity (0.45-0.96). Most models used data collected from a single time point or window to predict the occurrence of delirium at any point during hospital or ICU admission, and lacked mechanisms for providing pragmatic, actionable predictions to clinicians.ConclusionsAlthough most ICU delirium-prediction models have relatively good performance, they have limited applicability to clinical practice. Most models were static, making predictions based on data collected at a single time-point, failing to account for fluctuating conditions during ICU admission. Further research is needed to create clinically relevant dynamic delirium-prediction models that can adapt to changes in individual patient physiology over time and deliver actionable predictions to clinicians.
| S-EPMC7746201 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe investigated the effect of delirium burden in mechanically ventilated patients, beginning in the ICU and continuing throughout hospitalization, on functional neurologic outcomes up to 2.5 years following critical illness.MethodsProspective cohort study of enrolling 178 consecutive mechanically ventilated adult medical and surgical ICU patients between October 2013 and May 2016. Altogether, patients were assessed daily for delirium 2941days using the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU). Hospitalization delirium burden (DB) was quantified as number of hospital days with delirium divided by total days at risk. Survival status up to 2.5 years and neurologic outcomes using the Glasgow Outcome Scale were recorded at discharge 3, 6, and 12 months post-discharge.ResultsOf 178 patients, 19 (10.7%) were excluded from outcome analyses due to persistent coma. Among the remaining 159, 123 (77.4%) experienced delirium. DB was independently associated with >4-fold increased mortality at 2.5 years following ICU admission (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 4.77; 95% CI, 2.10-10.83; P < .001), and worse neurologic outcome at discharge (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.02; 0.01-0.09; P < .001), 3 (aOR, 0.11; 0.04-0.31; P < .001), 6 (aOR, 0.10; 0.04-0.29; P < .001), and 12 months (aOR, 0.19; 0.07-0.52; P = .001). DB in the ICU alone was not associated with mortality (HR, 1.79; 0.93-3.44; P = .082) and predicted neurologic outcome less strongly than entire hospital stay DB. Similarly, the number of delirium days in the ICU and for whole hospitalization were not associated with mortality (HR, 1.00; 0.93-1.08; P = .917 and HR, 0.98; 0.94-1.03, P = .535) nor with neurological outcomes, except for the association between ICU delirium days and neurological outcome at discharge (OR, 0.90; 0.81-0.99, P = .038).ConclusionsDelirium burden throughout hospitalization independently predicts long term neurologic outcomes and death up to 2.5 years after critical illness, and is more predictive than delirium burden in the ICU alone and number of delirium days.
| S-EPMC8638853 | biostudies-literature