Dataset Information

Nicotine replacement therapy for agitation and delirium management in the intensive care unit: a systematic review of the literature.

ABSTRACT: Active smokers are prevalent within the intensive care setting and place a significant burden on healthcare systems. Nicotine withdrawal due to forced abstinence on admission may contribute to increased agitation and delirium in this patient group. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether management of nicotine withdrawal, with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), reduces agitation and delirium in critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).The following sources were used in this review: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL Plus databases. Included studies reported delirium or agitation outcomes in current smokers, where NRT was used as management of nicotine withdrawal, in the intensive care setting. Studies were included regardless of design or number of participants. Data were extracted on ICU classification; study design; population baseline characteristics; allocation and dose of NRT; agitation and delirium assessment methods; and the frequency of agitation, delirium, and psychotropic medication use.Six studies were included. NRT was mostly prescribed for smokers with heavier smoking histories. Three studies reported an association between increased agitation or delirium and NRT use; one study could not find any significant benefit or harm from NRT use; and two described a reduction of symptomatic nicotine withdrawal. A lack of consistent and validated assessment measures, combined with limitations in the quality of reported data, contribute to conflicting results.Current evidence for the use of NRT in agitation and delirium management in the ICU is inconclusive. An evaluation of risk versus benefit on an individual patient basis should be considered when prescribing NRT. Further studies that consider prognostic balance, adjust for confounders, and employ validated assessment tools are urgently needed.

SUBMITTER: Kowalski M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5109763 | biostudies-other | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nicotine replacement therapy for agitation and delirium management in the intensive care unit: a systematic review of the literature.

Kowalski Melanie M Udy Andrew A AA McRobbie Hayden J HJ Dooley Michael J MJ

Journal of intensive care 20161115

<h4>Background</h4>Active smokers are prevalent within the intensive care setting and place a significant burden on healthcare systems. Nicotine withdrawal due to forced abstinence on admission may contribute to increased agitation and delirium in this patient group. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether management of nicotine withdrawal, with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), reduces agitation and delirium in critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (IC ...[more]

PMID: 27891229

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe management of pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD) in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) is beneficial for patients and makes it widely applied in clinical practice. Previous studies showed that the clinical practice of PAD in ICU was improving; yet relatively little information is available in China. This study aimed to investigate the practice of PAD in ICUs in China.MethodsA multicenter, nationwide survey was conducted using a clinician-directed questionnaire from September 19 to December 18, 2016. The questionnaire focused on the assessment and management of PAD by the clinicians in ICUs. The practice of PAD was compared among the four regions of China (North, Southeast, Northwest, and Southwest). The data were expressed as percentage and frequency. The Chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, and line-row Chi-square test were used.ResultsOf the 1011 valid questionnaire forms, the response rate was 80.37%. The clinicians came from 704 hospitals across 158 cities of China. The rate of PAD assessment was 75.77%, 90.21%, and 66.77%, respectively. The rates of PAD scores were 45.8%, 68.94%, and 34.03%, respectively. The visual analog scale, Richmond agitation-sedation scale, and confusion assessment method for the ICU were the first choices of scales for PAD assessment. Fentanyl, midazolam, and dexmedetomidine were the first choices of agents for analgesic, sedation, and delirium treatment. While choosing analgesics and sedatives, the clinicians put the pharmacological characteristics of drugs in the first place (66.07% and 76.36%). Daily interruption for sedation was carried out by 67.26% clinicians. Most of the clinicians (87.24%) used analgesics while using sedatives. Of the 738 (73%) clinicians titrating the sedatives on the basis of the proposed target sedation level, 268 (26.61%) clinicians just depended on their clinical experience. Totally, 519 (51.34%) clinicians never used other nondrug strategies for PAD. The working time of clinicians was an important factor in the management of analgesia and sedation rather than their titles and educational background. The ratios of pain score and sedation score in the Southwest China were the highest and the North China were the lowest. The ratios of delirium assessment and score were the same in the four regions of China. Moreover, the first choices of scales for PAD in the four regions were the same. However, the top three choices of agents in PAD treatment in the four regions were not the same.ConclusionsThe practice of PAD in China follows the international guidelines; however, the pain assessment should be improved. The PAD practice is a little different across the four regions of China; however, the trend is consistent.Trial registrationThe study is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (No. ChiCTR-OOC-16009014, www.chictr. org.cn/index.aspx.).

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:ObjectiveBenzodiazepines 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.DesignMultisite randomized clinical trial.SettingICUs of three large hospitals.ParticipantsTwo 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.MeasurementsPrimary 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.ResultsParticipants 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.ConclusionsWhen 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.

Project description:BackgroundDelirium is the most common cerebral dysfunction in the intensive care unit (ICU) and can be subdivided into a hypoactive, hyperactive, or mixed motor subtype based on the clinical manifestation. The aim of this review was to describe the distribution, pharmacological interventions, and outcomes of delirium motor subtypes in ICU patients.MethodsThis systematic scoping review was performed according to the PRISMA-ScR and Cochrane guidelines. We performed a systematic search in six major databases to identify relevant studies. A meta-regression analysis was performed where pooled estimates with 95% confidence intervals were computed by a random effect model.ResultsWe included 131 studies comprising 13,902 delirious patients. There was a large between-study heterogeneity among studies, including differences in study design, setting, population, and outcome reporting. Hypoactive delirium was the most prevalent delirium motor subtype (50.3% [95% CI 46.0-54.7]), followed by mixed delirium (27.7% [95% CI 24.1-31.3]) and hyperactive delirium (22.7% [95% CI 19.0-26.5]). When comparing the delirium motor subtypes, patients with mixed delirium experienced the longest delirium duration, ICU and hospital length of stay, the highest ICU and hospital mortality, and more frequently received administration of specific agents (antipsychotics, α2-agonists, benzodiazepines, and propofol) during ICU stay. In studies with high average age for delirious patients (> 65 years), patients were more likely to experience hypoactive delirium.ConclusionsHypoactive delirium was the most prevalent motor subtype in critically ill patients. Mixed delirium had the worst outcomes in terms of delirium duration, length of stay, and mortality, and received more pharmacological interventions compared to other delirium motor subtypes. Few studies contributed to secondary outcomes; hence, these results should be interpreted with care. The large between-study heterogeneity suggests that a more standardized methodology in delirium research is warranted.

Dataset Information

Nicotine replacement therapy for agitation and delirium management in the intensive care unit: a systematic review of the literature.

Publications

Nicotine replacement therapy for agitation and delirium management in the intensive care unit: a systematic review of the literature.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets