Dataset Information

Deprescribing in the Pharmacologic Management of Delirium: A Randomized Trial in the Intensive Care Unit.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Benzodiazepines and anticholinergics are risk factors for delirium in the intensive care unit (ICU). We tested the impact of a deprescribing intervention on short-term delirium outcomes. DESIGN:Multisite randomized clinical trial. SETTING:ICUs of three large hospitals. PARTICIPANTS:Two hundred adults aged 18 years or older and admitted to an ICU with delirium, according to the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU). Participants had a contraindication to haloperidol (seizure disorder or prolonged QT interval) or preference against haloperidol as a treatment for delirium, and were excluded for serious mental illness, stroke, pregnancy, or alcohol withdrawal. Participants were randomized to a deprescribing intervention or usual care. The intervention included electronic alerts combined with pharmacist support to deprescribe anticholinergics and benzodiazepines. MEASUREMENTS:Primary outcomes were delirium duration measured by the CAM-ICU and severity measured by the Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98 (DRS-R-98) and the CAM-ICU-7; secondary outcomes included adverse events and mortality. RESULTS:Participants had a mean age of 61.8 (SD = 14.3) years, 59% were female, and 52% were African American, with no significant differences in baseline characteristics between groups. No differences between groups were identified in the number exposed to anticholinergics (P = .219) or benzodiazepines (P = .566), the median total anticholinergic score (P = .282), or the median total benzodiazepine dose in lorazepam equivalents (P = .501). Neither median delirium/coma-free days (P = .361) nor median change in delirium severity scores (P = .582 for DRS-R-98; P = .333 for CAM-ICU-7) were different between groups. No differences in adverse events or mortality were identified. CONCLUSIONS:When added to state-of-the-art clinical services, this deprescribing intervention had no impact on medication use in ICU participants. Given the age of the population, results of clinical outcomes may not be easily extrapolated to older adults. Nonetheless, improved approaches for deprescribing or preventing anticholinergics and benzodiazepines should be developed to determine the impact on delirium outcomes. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:695-702, 2019.

SUBMITTER: Campbell NL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6540083 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Deprescribing in the Pharmacologic Management of Delirium: A Randomized Trial in the Intensive Care Unit.

Campbell Noll L NL Perkins Anthony J AJ Khan Babar A BA Gao Sujuan S Farber Mark O MO Khan Sikandar S Wang Sophia S Boustani Malaz A MA

Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 20190121 4

<h4>Objective</h4>Benzodiazepines and anticholinergics are risk factors for delirium in the intensive care unit (ICU). We tested the impact of a deprescribing intervention on short-term delirium outcomes.<h4>Design</h4>Multisite randomized clinical trial.<h4>Setting</h4>ICUs of three large hospitals.<h4>Participants</h4>Two hundred adults aged 18 years or older and admitted to an ICU with delirium, according to the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU ...[more]

PMID: 30664239

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE:Delirium in the intensive care units (ICUs) is prevalent, with both delirium duration and delirium severity associated with adverse outcomes. We designed a pragmatic trial to test the efficacy of a pharmacological management of delirium (PMD) bundle in improving delirium/coma-free days and reducing delirium severity among ICU patients. DESIGN:A randomized pragmatic clinical trial. SETTING:Medical, surgical, and progressive ICUs of three tertiary care hospitals. PARTICIPANTS:A total of 351 critically ill patients. INTERVENTION:A multicomponent PMD bundle consisting of reducing the exposure to 20 definite anticholinergic medications and benzodiazepines and prescribing low-dose haloperidol. MEASUREMENTS:The primary outcomes were delirium/coma-free days, measured through the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU), and delirium severity, measured through Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 and the CAM-ICU-7. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital and posthospital discharge 30-day mortality, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, and delirium-related hospital complications. RESULTS:We randomized 351 critically ill delirious patients (mean age = 59.3 years [SD = 16.9 years]; 52% female, 42% African Americans) to receive the PMD bundle or usual care. There were no significant differences in median delirium/coma-free days at day 8 (PMD vs usual care = 4 [interquartile range {IQR} = 2-7] days vs 5 [IQR = 1-7] days; P = .888) or at day 30 (PMD vs usual care = 26 [IQR 19-29] days vs 26 [IQR, 14-29] days; P = .991). There were no significant differences for decrease in delirium severity at day 8, but at hospital discharge, the intervention group showed a greater reduction in delirium severity (mean decrease in CAM-ICU-7 score for PMD vs usual care = 3.2 [SD = 3.3] vs 2.5 [SD = 3.2]; P = .046). No differences were observed between groups for ICU and hospital lengths of stay, mortality, and delirium-related hospital complications. Similar results were observed when analyses were limited to patients 65 years or older and 75 years or older. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE:Implementing the PMD bundle in the ICU did not reduce delirium duration or severity among critically ill patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00842608. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1057-1065, 2019.

Project description:BackgroundDelirium is a common complication among intensive care unit (ICU) patients that is linked to negative clinical outcomes. However, adherence to the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the ICU (PADIS guidelines), which recommend the use of the ABCDEF bundle, is sub-optimal in routine clinical care. To address this issue, AI-AntiDelirium, a nurse-led artificial intelligence-assisted prevention and management tool for delirium, was developed by our research team. Our pilot study yielded positive findings regarding the use of AI-AntiDelirium in preventing patient ICU delirium and improving activities of daily living and increasing intervention adherence by health care staff.MethodsThe proposed large-scale pragmatic, open-label, parallel-group, cluster randomized controlled study will assess the impact of AI-AntiDelirium on the incidence of ICU delirium and delirium-related outcomes. Six ICUs in two tertiary hospitals in China will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to an AI-AntiDelirium or a PADIS guidelines group. A target sample size of 1,452 ICU patients aged 50 years and older treated in the ICU for at least 24 hours will be included. The primary outcome evaluated will be the incidence of ICU delirium and the secondary outcomes will be the duration of ICU delirium, length of ICU and hospital stay, ICU and in-hospital mortality rates, patient cognitive function, patient activities of daily living, and ICU nurse adherence to the ABCDEF bundle.DiscussionIf this large-scale trial provides evidence of the effectiveness of AI-AntiDelirium, an artificial intelligence-assisted system tool, in decreasing the incidence of ICU delirium, length of ICU and hospital stay, ICU and in-hospital mortality rates, patient cognitive function, and patient activities of daily living while increasing ICU nurse adherence to the ABCDEF bundle, it will have a profound impact on the management of ICU delirium in both research and clinical practice.Clinical trial registrationChiCTR1900023711 (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Accurate prediction of delirium in the intensive care unit (ICU) may facilitate efficient use of early preventive strategies and stratification of ICU patients by delirium risk in clinical research, but the optimal delirium prediction model to use is unclear. We compared the predictive performance and user convenience of the prediction model for delirium (PRE-DELIRIC) and early prediction model for delirium (E-PRE-DELIRIC) in ICU patients and determined the value of a two-stage calculation. METHODS:This 7-country, 11-hospital, prospective cohort study evaluated consecutive adults admitted to the ICU who could be reliably assessed for delirium using the Confusion Assessment Method-ICU or the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist. The predictive performance of the models was measured using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Calibration was assessed graphically. A physician questionnaire evaluated user convenience. For the two-stage calculation we used E-PRE-DELIRIC immediately after ICU admission and updated the prediction using PRE-DELIRIC after 24 h. RESULTS:In total 2178 patients were included. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was significantly greater for PRE-DELIRIC (0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.71-0.76)) compared to E-PRE-DELIRIC (0.68 (95% confidence interval 0.66-0.71)) (z score of -?2.73 (p?<?0.01)). Both models were well-calibrated. The sensitivity improved when using the two-stage calculation in low-risk patients. Compared to PRE-DELIRIC, ICU physicians (n?=?68) rated the E-PRE-DELIRIC model more feasible. CONCLUSIONS:While both ICU delirium prediction models have moderate-to-good performance, the PRE-DELIRIC model predicts delirium better. However, ICU physicians rated the user convenience of E-PRE-DELIRIC superior to PRE-DELIRIC. In low-risk patients the delirium prediction further improves after an update with the PRE-DELIRIC model after 24 h. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02518646 . Registered on 21 July 2015.

Project description:ImportanceThe effects of intensive care unit (ICU) visiting hours remain uncertain.ObjectiveTo determine whether a flexible family visitation policy in the ICU reduces the incidence of delirium.Design, setting and participantsCluster-crossover randomized clinical trial involving patients, family members, and clinicians from 36 adult ICUs with restricted visiting hours (<4.5 hours per day) in Brazil. Participants were recruited from April 2017 to June 2018, with follow-up until July 2018.InterventionsFlexible visitation (up to 12 hours per day) supported by family education (n = 837 patients, 652 family members, and 435 clinicians) or usual restricted visitation (median, 1.5 hours per day; n = 848 patients, 643 family members, and 391 clinicians). Nineteen ICUs started with flexible visitation, and 17 started with restricted visitation.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome was incidence of delirium during ICU stay, assessed using the CAM-ICU. Secondary outcomes included ICU-acquired infections for patients; symptoms of anxiety and depression assessed using the HADS (range, 0 [best] to 21 [worst]) for family members; and burnout for ICU staff (Maslach Burnout Inventory).ResultsAmong 1685 patients, 1295 family members, and 826 clinicians enrolled, 1685 patients (100%) (mean age, 58.5 years; 47.2% women), 1060 family members (81.8%) (mean age, 45.2 years; 70.3% women), and 737 clinicians (89.2%) (mean age, 35.5 years; 72.9% women) completed the trial. The mean daily duration of visits was significantly higher with flexible visitation (4.8 vs 1.4 hours; adjusted difference, 3.4 hours [95% CI, 2.8 to 3.9]; P < .001). The incidence of delirium during ICU stay was not significantly different between flexible and restricted visitation (18.9% vs 20.1%; adjusted difference, -1.7% [95% CI, -6.1% to 2.7%]; P = .44). Among 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 did not differ significantly between flexible and restricted visitation, including ICU-acquired infections (3.7% vs 4.5%; adjusted difference, -0.8% [95% CI, -2.1% to 1.0%]; P = .38) and staff burnout (22.0% vs 24.8%; adjusted difference, -3.8% [95% CI, -4.8% to 12.5%]; P = .36). For family members, median anxiety (6.0 vs 7.0; adjusted difference, -1.6 [95% CI, -2.3 to -0.9]; P < .001) and depression scores (4.0 vs 5.0; adjusted difference, -1.2 [95% CI, -2.0 to -0.4]; P = .003) were significantly better with flexible visitation.Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients in the ICU, a flexible family visitation policy, vs standard restricted visiting hours, did not significantly reduce the incidence of delirium.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02932358.

Dataset Information

Deprescribing in the Pharmacologic Management of Delirium: A Randomized Trial in the Intensive Care Unit.

Publications

Deprescribing in the Pharmacologic Management of Delirium: A Randomized Trial in the Intensive Care Unit.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets