Dataset Information

Non-Pharmacological Nursing Interventions for Prevention and Treatment of Delirium in Hospitalized Adult Patients: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT: Delirium is a common neurobehavioral complication in hospitalized patients that can occur in the acute phase and lead to poor long-term outcomes. The purpose of this study was to identify non-pharmacological nursing interventions for the prevention and treatment of delirium in hospitalized adult patients. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize the findings of published studies. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library CENTRAL databases for randomized controlled trials in January 2021. We report this systematic review according to the PRISMA 2009 checklist. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021226538). Nine studies were systematically reviewed for non-pharmacological nursing interventions for the prevention and treatment of delirium. The types of non-pharmacological nursing interventions included multicomponent intervention, multidisciplinary care, multimedia education, music listening, mentoring of family caregivers concerning delirium management, bright light exposure, ear plugs, and interventions for simulated family presence using pre-recorded video messages. These results could help nurses select and utilize non-pharmacological nursing interventions for the prevention and treatment of delirium in clinical nursing practice.

SUBMITTER: Lee Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8395046 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe high prevalence of delirium among postoperative patients has increased morbidity and mortality. The kind of drug that can effectively reduce the incidence of delirium has become the focus of discussion in recent years. However, a consensus in this respect has yet to be reached.MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) were retrieved from the PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Embase databases from their inception through October 12, 2018. We included RCTs of pharmacological prevention for postoperative delirium in adults (at least 18 years), and the Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate the methodological quality of trials. The primary outcomes were the risk ratios (RRs) of incidence of postoperative delirium, and the secondary outcomes were the RRs of mortality and adverse events in the intervention and control groups.ResultsThirty-eight trials, which comprised 20302 patients and 18 different drugs, were included in the analysis. Of the 38 studies, 17 were rated as low risk with respect to methodological quality. Dexmedetomidine administration (RR 0.58, 95%CI 0.44-0.76, P<0.01) was associated with a significantly lower incidence of postoperative delirium than the control conditions. However, the findings from the studies with a low risk of bias did not show a significant difference in this beneficial effect (RR 0.64, 95%CI 0.39-1.04, P=0.07). The antipsychotic drugs olanzapine (RR 0.44, 95%CI 0.30- 0.65, P<0.01) and risperidone (RR 0.42, 95%CI 0.19-0.92, P=0.03) had promising effects, but there was a lack of sufficient evidence to obtain a definitive conclusion. The beneficial effect of other drugs, including haloperidol, methylprednisolone, dexamethasone, gabapentin, ketamine, cyproheptadine, donepezil, hypertonic saline, melatonin, nimodipine, ondansetron, pregabalin, rivastigmine, TJ-54, and tryptophan, was not proven on the basis of present evidence.ConclusionAmong the pharmacological prophylactic measures for postoperative delirium, dexmedetomidine, olanzapine, and risperidone showed higher efficacy than other drugs. However, more high-quality evidence is needed to confirm these results.

Project description:The purpose of this study was to identify the types and contents of non-pharmacological delirium prevention interventions applied to inpatients in general wards, and to verified the effectiveness of the interventions on the incidence of delirium. We performed an extensive search of bibliographic databases and registries (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, PubMed and Google Scholar, and Korean DB such as RISS, DBpia, KISS, NDSL and KCI) using terms to identify delirium, prevention, and non-pharmacological. We searched all databases from their inception to January 2021 and imposed restriction on language of publication in English and Korean. We included studies if they were conducted as all types of randomized controlled trials (RCT), involving adult patients aged 19 years or more who were admitted to a general ward. We included trials comparing non-pharmacological intervention versus usual care. The entire process of data selection and extraction, assessment of risk of bias with ROB2.O was independently performed by three researchers. The estimated effect size was an odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval. The fixed effects model and general inverse variance estimation method were adopted. The type of non-pharmacological delirium prevention interventions for inpatients in general ward was mainly multi-component intervention to correct delirium risk factors. The content and intensity of non-pharmacological interventions varied greatly depending on the characteristics of the patient and the clinical situation. As a result of the meta-analysis, non-pharmacological multi-component intervention was effective in reducing the incidence of delirium, and it was confirmed that it was effective in reducing the incidence of delirium in both the internal and surgical wards. It was confirmed by quantitative evidence that non-pharmacological interventions, especially multi-component interventions, were effective in preventing delirium in general ward inpatients.

Project description:Gastrointestinal (GI) dysmotility is a common complication in acute, critically ill, postoperative, and chronic patients that may lead to impaired nutrient delivery, poor clinical, and patient-reported outcomes. Several pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions to treat GI dysmotility were investigated in dozens of clinical studies. However, they often yielded conflicting results, at least in part, because various (nonstandardized) definitions of GI dysmotility were used and methodological quality of studies was poor. While a universally accepted definition of GI dysmotility is yet to be developed, a systematic analysis of data derived from double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials may provide robust data on absolute and relative effectiveness of various interventions as the study outcome (GI motility) was assessed in the least biased manner.To systematically review data from double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials to determine and compare the effectiveness of interventions that affect GI motility.Three electronic databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and EMBASE) were searched. A random effects model was used for meta-analysis. The summary estimates were reported as mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).A total of 38 double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trials involving 2371 patients were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. These studies investigated a total of 20 different interventions, of which 6 interventions were meta-analyzed. Of them, the use of dopamine receptor antagonists (MD, -8.99; 95% CI, -17.72 to -0.27; P = 0.04) and macrolides (MD, -26.04; 95% CI, -51.25 to -0.82; P = 0.04) significantly improved GI motility compared with the placebo group. The use of botulism toxin significantly impaired GI motility compared with the placebo group (MD, 5.31; 95% CI, -0.04 to 10.67; P = 0.05). Other interventions (dietary factors, probiotics, hormones) did not affect GI motility.Based on the best available data and taking into account the safety profile of each class of intervention, dopamine receptor antagonists and macrolides significantly improve GI motility and are medications of choice in treating GI dysmotility.

Project description:BackgroundDelirium is a common disorder among hospitalized older patients and results in increased morbidity and mortality. The prevention of delirium is still challenging in older patient care. The role of antipsychotics in delirium prevention has been limited. Therefore, we conducted a trial to investigate the efficacy of quetiapine use to prevent delirium in hospitalized older medical patients.MethodsThis study was a randomized double-blind controlled trial conducted at Ramathibodi Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. Patients aged ≥65 years hospitalized in the internal medicine service were randomized to quetiapine 12.5 mg or placebo once daily at bedtime for a maximum 7-day duration. The primary end point was delirium incidence. Secondary end points were delirium duration, length of hospital stay, ICU admission, rehospitalization and mortality within 30 and 90 days.ResultsA total of 122 patients were enrolled in the study. Eight (6.6%) left the trial before receiving the first dose of the intervention, whereas 114 (93.4%) were included in an intention-to-treat analysis allocated to the quetiapine or placebo group (n = 57 each). The delirium incidence rates in the quetiapine and placebo groups were 14.0 and 8.8% (OR = 1.698, 95% CI 0.520-5.545, P = 0.381), respectively. Other endpoints in the quetiapine and placebo groups were the median length of hospital stay, 6 (4-8) days versus 5 (4-8) days (P = 0.133), respectively; delirium duration, 4 (2.3-6.5) versus 3 (1.5-4.0) days (P = 0.557), respectively; ICU admission, 3 (5.3%) patients from both groups (P = 1.000); and mortality in the quetiapine and placebo groups, 1 (1.8%) versus 2 (3.5%) at 30 days (P = 0.566) and 7 (12.3%) versus 9 (15.8%) days at 90 days (P = 0.591). There were no significant differences in other outcomes. None of the participants reported adverse events.ConclusionsQuetiapine prophylaxis did not reduce delirium incidence in hospitalized older medical patients. The use of quetiapine to prevent delirium in this population group should not be recommended.Trial registrationThis trial was retrospectively registered with the Thai clinical trials registry (TCTR) at clinicaltrials.in.th (TCTR20190927001) on September 26, 2019.

Project description:BackgroundSarcopenia is a chronic disease marked by gradual muscle system and functional decline. Prior research indicates its prevalence in those under 60 varies from 8 to 36%. There is limited evidence on the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for sarcopenia prevention in menopausal women aged 40-60. This study examines the influence of such interventions for sarcopenia prevention on these women.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PEDro, and Airiti Library were searched from inception until May 5, 2023. Randomized controlled trials that examined exercise, vitamin D and protein supplementation effects on muscle mass, strength, and physical function. Quality assessment used the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and analysis employed Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 2.0.ResultsA total of 27 randomized controlled trials, involving 1,989 participants were identified. Meta-analysis results showed exercise improved lean body mass (SMD = 0.232, 95% CI: 0.097, 0.366), handgrip strength (SMD = 0.901, 95% CI: 0.362, 1.441), knee extension strength (SMD = 0.698, 95% CI: 0.384, 1.013). Resistance training had a small effect on lean body mass, longer exercise duration (> 12 weeks) and higher frequency (60-90 min, 3 sessions/week) showed small to moderate effects on lean body mass. Vitamin D supplementation improved handgrip strength (SMD = 0.303, 95% CI: 0.130, 0.476), but not knee extension strength. There was insufficient data to assess the impact of protein supplementation on muscle strength.ConclusionsExercise effectively improves muscle mass, and strength in menopausal women. Resistance training with 3 sessions per week, lasting 20-90 min for at least 6 weeks, is most effective. Vitamin D supplementation enhances small muscle group strength. Further trials are needed to assess the effects of vitamin D and protein supplementation on sarcopenia prevention.Registration numberThis review was registered on PROSPERO CRD42022329273.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Neonatal intensive care units (NICU) around the world increasingly use music interventions. The most recent systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) dates from 2009. Since then, 15 new RCTs have been published. We provide an updated systematic review on the possible benefits of music interventions on premature infants' well-being. METHODS:We searched 13 electronic databases and 12 journals from their first available date until August 2016. Included were all RCTs published in English with at least 10 participants per group, including infants born prematurely and admitted to the NICU. Interventions were either recorded music interventions or live music therapy interventions. All control conditions were accepted as long as the effects of the music intervention could be analysed separately. A meta-analysis was not possible due to incompleteness and heterogeneity of the data. RESULTS:After removal of duplicates the searches retrieved 4893 citations, 20 of which fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria. The 20 included studies encompassed 1128 participants receiving recorded or live music interventions in the NICU between 24 and 40 weeks gestational age. Twenty-six different outcomes were reported which we classified into three categories: physiological parameters; growth and feeding; behavioural state, relaxation outcomes and pain. Live music interventions were shown to improve sleep in three out of the four studies and heart rate in two out of the four studies. Recorded music improved heart rate in two out of six studies. Better feeding and sucking outcomes were reported in one study using live music and in two studies using recorded music. CONCLUSIONS:Although music interventions show promising results in some studies, the variation in quality of the studies, age groups, outcome measures and timing of the interventions across the studies makes it difficult to draw strong conclusions on the effects of music in premature infants.

Project description:The registration of clinical trials has been promoted to prevent publication bias and increase research transparency. Despite general agreement about the minimum amount of information needed for trial registration, we lack clear guidance on descriptions of non-pharmacologic interventions in trial registries. We aimed to evaluate the quality of registry descriptions of non-pharmacologic interventions assessed in ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patient education.On 6 May 2009, we searched for all ongoing RCTs registered in the 10 trial registries accessible through the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We included trials evaluating an educational intervention (that is, designed to teach or train patients about their own health) and dedicated to participants, their family members or home caregivers. We used a standardized data extraction form to collect data related to the description of the experimental intervention, the centers, and the caregivers.We selected 268 of 642 potentially eligible studies and appraised a random sample of 150 records. All selected trials were registered in 4 registers, mainly ClinicalTrials.gov (61%). The median [interquartile range] target sample size was 205 [100 to 400] patients. The comparator was mainly usual care (47%) or active treatment (47%). A minority of records (17%, 95% CI 11 to 23%) reported an overall adequate description of the intervention (that is, description that reported the content, mode of delivery, number, frequency, duration of sessions and overall duration of the intervention). Further, for most reports (59%), important information about the content of the intervention was missing. The description of the mode of delivery of the intervention was reported for 52% of studies, the number of sessions for 74%, the frequency of sessions for 58%, the duration of each session for 45% and the overall duration for 63%. Information about the caregivers was missing for 70% of trials. Most trials (73%) took place in the United States or United Kingdom, 64% involved only one centre, and participating centers were mainly tertiary-care, academic or university hospitals (51%).Educational interventions assessed in ongoing RCTs of educational interventions are poorly described in trial registries. The lack of adequate description raises doubts about the ability of trial registration to help patients and researchers know about the treatment evaluated in trials of education.

Project description:ImportanceAlthough several pharmacological interventions for delirium have been investigated, their overall benefit and safety remain unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate evidence regarding pharmacological interventions for delirium treatment and prevention.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, ClinicalKey, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to May 17, 2018.Study selectionRandomized clinical trials (RCTs) examining pharmacological interventions for delirium treatment and prevention.Data extraction and synthesisTo extract data according to a predetermined list of interests, the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines were applied, and all meta-analytic procedures were conducted using a random-effects model.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcomes were treatment response in patients with delirium and the incidence of delirium in patients at risk of delirium.ResultsA total of 58 RCTs were included, in which 20 RCTs with 1435 participants (mean age, 63.5 years; 65.1% male) compared the outcomes of treatment and 38 RCTs with 8168 participants (mean age, 70.2 years; 53.4% male) examined the prevention of delirium. A network meta-analysis demonstrated that haloperidol plus lorazepam provided the best response rate for delirium treatment (odds ratio [OR], 28.13; 95% CI, 2.38-333.08) compared with placebo/control. For delirium prevention, the ramelteon, olanzapine, risperidone, and dexmedetomidine hydrochloride groups had significantly lower delirium occurrence rates than placebo/control (OR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01-0.66 for ramelteon; OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.09-0.69 for olanzapine; OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.07-0.99 for risperidone; and OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31-0.80 for dexmedetomidine hydrochloride). None of the pharmacological treatments were significantly associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality compared with placebo/control.Conclusions and relevanceThis network meta-analysis demonstrated that haloperidol plus lorazepam might be the best treatment and ramelteon the best preventive medicine for delirium. None of the pharmacological interventions for treatment or prophylaxis increased the all-cause mortality.

Project description:BackgroundPatients who develop postoperative delirium (POD) have several clinical complications, such as increased morbidity, increased hospital stays, higher hospital costs, cognitive and functional impairment, and higher mortality. POD is a clinical condition preventable by standard non-pharmacological measures An intensive Occupational Therapy (OT) intervention has been shown to be highly effective in preventing delirium in critically ill medical patients, but it is unknown the effect in surgical patients. Thus, we designed a prospective clinical study with the aim to determine whether patients undergoing intervention by the OT team have a lower incidence of POD compared to the group treated only with standard measures.MethodsA multicenter, single-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted between October 2018 and April 2021, in Santiago of Chile, at a university hospital and at a public hospital. Patients older than 75 years undergoing elective major surgery were eligible for the trial inclusion. Patients with cognitive impairment, severe communication disorder and cultural language limitation, delirium at admission or before surgery, and enrolled in another study were excluded. The intervention consisted of OT therapy twice a day plus standard internationally recommended non-pharmacological prevention intervention during 5 days after surgery. Our primary outcome was development of delirium and postoperative subsyndromal delirium.ResultsIn total 160 patients were studied. In the interventional group, treated with an intensive prevention by OT, nine patients (12.9%) developed delirium after surgery and in the control group four patients (5.5%) [p = 0.125, RR 2.34 CI 95 (0.75-7.27)]. Whereas subsyndromal POD was present in 38 patients in the control group (52.1%) and in 34 (48.6%) in the intervention group [p = 0.4, RR 0.93 CI95 (0.67-1.29)]. A post hoc analysis determined that the patient's comorbidity and cognitive status prior to hospitalization were the main risk factors to develop delirium after surgery.DiscussionPatients undergoing intervention by the OT team did not have a lower incidence of POD compared to the group treated only with standard non-pharmacological measures in adults older than 75 years who went for major surgery.Clinical trial registrationwww.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03704090.

Dataset Information

Non-Pharmacological Nursing Interventions for Prevention and Treatment of Delirium in Hospitalized Adult Patients: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets