A longitudinal study of motor subtypes in delirium: relationship with other phenomenology, etiology, medication exposure and prognosis

Recent Insights on Prevalence and Corelations of Hypoactive Delirium

Delirium is a complex neuropsychiatric syndrome which is common in all medical settings. It often goes unrecognized due to difficulties in the detection of its hypoactive variant. This review aims to provide an up-to-date account on recent research on hypoactive delirium (HD). Thirty-eight studies, which were conducted in various clinical settings, including the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), were included in this review. Those studies involved recent research that has been published during the last 6 years. Prevalence of HD was found to vary considerably among different settings. HD seems to be more common in critically ill patients and less common in patients examined by consultation-liaison psychiatric services and in mixed patient populations. The presence of HD in ICU patients was associated with higher short- and long-term mortality and other adverse outcomes, but no such association was reported in other settings. Research on other possible associations of HD with clinical variables and on symptom presentation yielded inconclusive results, although there is some evidence for a possible association of HD with benzodiazepine use. There are several methodological issues that need to be addressed by future research. Future studies should examine HD in the primary care setting; treatment interventions should also be the objective of future research.

Postoperative Delirium in the Geriatric Patient

Postoperative delirium, a common complication in older surgical patients, is independently associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Patients older than 65 years receive greater than one-third of the more than 40 million anesthetics delivered yearly in the United States. This number is expected to increase with the aging of the population. Thus, it is increasingly important that perioperative clinicians who care for geriatric patients have an understanding of the complex syndrome of postoperative delirium.

Palliative Care in the Emergency Department

Patients seek care in the emergency department (ED) for immediate relief of pain or other symptoms. Emergency physicians are trained to provide care that focuses on disease-directed treatment of acute illnesses; the ED is not considered an entry point for palliative care. Despite this, many patients with chronic or end-stage diseases seek treatment in the ED each year. Improving quality of life (QOL) is an overarching principle of palliative care. The ED is poised to improve patients' QOL by providing palliative interventions to manage pain and exacerbations of chronic illnesses or care near the end of life.

A comparison of delirium diagnosis in elderly medical inpatients using the CAM, DRS-R98, DSM-IV and DSM-5 criteria

BACKGROUND

The recently published DSM-5 criteria for delirium may lead to different case identification and rates of delirium than previous classifications. The aims of this study are to determine how the new DSM-5 criteria compare with DSM-IV in identification of delirium in elderly medical inpatients and to investigate the agreement between different methods, using CAM, DRS-R98, DSM-IV, and DSM-5 criteria.

METHODS

Prospective, observational study of elderly patients aged 70+ admitted under the acute medical teams in a regional general hospital. Each participant was assessed within 3 days of admission using the DSM-5, and DSM-IV criteria plus the DRS-R98, and CAM scales.

RESULTS

We assessed 200 patients [mean age 81.1±6.5; 50% female; pre-existing cognitive impairment in 63%]. The prevalence rates of delirium for each diagnostic method were: 13.0% (n = 26) for DSM-5; 19.5% (n = 39) for DSM-IV; 13.5% (n = 27) for DRS-R98 and 17.0%, (n = 34) for CAM. Using tetrachoric correlation coefficients the agreement between DSM-5 and DSM-IV was statistically significant (ρtetr = 0.64, SE = 0.1, p < 0.0001). Similar significant agreement was found between the four methods.

CONCLUSIONS

DSM-IV is the most inclusive diagnostic method for delirium, while DSM-5 is the most restrictive. In addition, these classification systems identify different cases of delirium. This could have clinical, financial, and research implications. However, both classification systems have significant agreement in the identification of the same concept (delirium). Clarity of diagnosis is required for classification but also further research considering the relevance in predicting outcomes can allow for more detailed evaluation of the DSM-5 criteria.

Management of delirium in palliative care: a review

Delirium is a complex but common disorder in palliative care with a prevalence between 13 and 88 % but a particular frequency at the end of life (terminal delirium). By reviewing the most relevant studies (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycLit, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library), a correct assessment to make the diagnosis (e.g., DSM-5, delirium assessment tools), the identification of the possible etiological factors, and the application of multicomponent and integrated interventions were reported as the correct steps to effectively manage delirium in palliative care. In terms of medications, both conventional (e.g., haloperidol) and atypical antipsychotics (e.g., olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine, aripiprazole) were shown to be equally effective in the treatment of delirium. No recommendation was possible in palliative care regarding the use of other drugs (e.g., α-2 receptors agonists, psychostimulants, cholinesterase inhibitors, melatonergic drugs). Non-pharmacological interventions (e.g., behavioral and educational) were also shown to be important in the management of delirium. More research is necessary to clarify how to more thoroughly manage delirium in palliative care.

Frequency of delirium and subsyndromal delirium in an adult acute hospital population

Background The frequency of full syndromal and subsyndromal delirium is understudied. Aims We conducted a point prevalence study in a general hospital. Method Possible delirium identified by testing for inattention was evaluated regarding delirium status (full/subsyndromal delirium) using categorical (Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), DSM-IV) and dimensional (Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R98) scores) methods. Results In total 162 of 311 patients (52%) screened positive for inattention. Delirium was diagnosed in 55 patients (17.7%) using DSM-IV, 52 (16.7%) using CAM and 58 (18.6%) using DRS-R98⩾12 with concordance for 38 (12.2%) individuals. Subsyndromal delirium was identified in 24 patients (7.7%) using a DRS-R98 score of 7-11 and 41 (13.2%) using 2/4 CAM criteria. Subsyndromal delirium with inattention (v. without) had greater disturbance of multiple delirium symptoms. Conclusions The point prevalence of delirium and subsyndromal delirium was 25%. There was modest concordance between DRS-R98, DSM-IV and CAM delirium diagnoses. Inattention should be central to subsyndromal delirium definitions.

Delirium diagnosis methodology used in research: a survey-based study

OBJECTIVE

To describe methodology used to diagnose delirium in research studies evaluating delirium detection tools.

METHODS

The authors used a survey to address reference rater methodology for delirium diagnosis, including rater characteristics, sources of patient information, and diagnostic process, completed via web or telephone interview according to respondent preference. Participants were authors of 39 studies included in three recent systematic reviews of delirium detection instruments in hospitalized patients.

RESULTS

Authors from 85% (N = 33) of the 39 eligible studies responded to the survey. The median number of raters per study was 2.5 (interquartile range: 2-3); 79% were physicians. The raters' median duration of clinical experience with delirium diagnosis was 7 years (interquartile range: 4-10), with 5% having no prior clinical experience. Inter-rater reliability was evaluated in 70% of studies. Cognitive tests and delirium detection tools were used in the delirium reference rating process in 61% (N = 21) and 45% (N = 15) of studies, respectively, with 33% (N = 11) using both and 27% (N = 9) using neither. When patients were too drowsy or declined to participate in delirium evaluation, 70% of studies (N = 23) used all available information for delirium diagnosis, whereas 15% excluded such patients.

CONCLUSION

Significant variability exists in reference standard methods for delirium diagnosis in published research. Increasing standardization by documenting inter-rater reliability, using standardized cognitive and delirium detection tools, incorporating diagnostic expert consensus panels, and using all available information in patients declining or unable to participate with formal testing may help advance delirium research by increasing consistency of case detection and improving generalizability of research results.

Concordance between DSM-IV and DSM-5 criteria for delirium diagnosis in a pooled database of 768 prospectively evaluated patients using the delirium rating scale-revised-98

BACKGROUND

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual fifth edition (DSM-5) provides new criteria for delirium diagnosis. We examined delirium diagnosis using these new criteria compared with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual fourth edition (DSM-IV) in a large dataset of patients assessed for delirium and related presentations.

METHODS

Patient data (n = 768) from six prospectively collected cohorts, clinically assessed using DSM-IV and the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R98), were pooled. Post hoc application of DRS-R98 item scores were used to rate DSM-5 criteria. 'Strict' and 'relaxed' DSM-5 criteria to ascertain delirium were compared to rates determined by DSM-IV.

RESULTS

Using DSM-IV by clinical assessment, delirium was found in 510/768 patients (66%). Strict DSM-5 criteria categorized 158 as delirious including 155 (30%) with DSM-IV delirium, whereas relaxed DSM-5 criteria identified 466 as delirious, including 455 (89%) diagnosed by DSM-IV (P <0.001). The concordance between the different diagnostic methods was: 53% (ĸ = 0.22) between DSM-IV and the strict DSM-5, 91% (ĸ = 0.82) between the DSM-IV and relaxed DSM-5 criteria and 60% (ĸ = 0.29) between the strict versus relaxed DSM-5 criteria. Only 155 cases were identified as delirium by all three approaches. The 55 (11%) patients with DSM-IV delirium who were not rated as delirious by relaxed criteria had lower mean DRS-R98 total scores than those rated as delirious (13.7 ± 3.9 versus 23.7 ± 6.0; P <0.001). Conversely, mean DRS-R98 score (21.1 ± 6.4) for the 70% not rated as delirious by strict DSM-5 criteria was consistent with suggested cutoff scores for full syndromal delirium. Only 11 cases met DSM-5 criteria that were not deemed to have DSM-IV delirium.

CONCLUSIONS

The concordance between DSM-IV and the new DSM-5 delirium criteria varies considerably depending on the interpretation of criteria. Overly-strict adherence for some new text details in DSM-5 criteria would reduce the number of delirium cases diagnosed; however, a more 'relaxed' approach renders DSM-5 criteria comparable to DSM-IV with minimal impact on their actual application and is thus recommended.

Effect of melatonin on incidence of delirium among patients with hip fracture: a multicentre, double-blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Disturbance of the sleep-wake cycle is a characteristic of delirium. In addition, changes in melatonin rhythm influence the circadian rhythm and are associated with delirium. We compared the effect of melatonin and placebo on the incidence and duration of delirium.

METHODS

We performed this multicentre, double-blind, randomized controlled trial between November 2008 and May 2012 in 1 academic and 2 nonacademic hospitals. Patients aged 65 years or older who were scheduled for acute hip surgery were eligible for inclusion. Patients received melatonin 3 mg or placebo in the evening for 5 consecutive days, starting within 24 hours after admission. The primary outcome was incidence of delirium within 8 days of admission. We also monitored the duration of delirium.

RESULTS

A total of 452 patients were randomly assigned to the 2 study groups. We subsequently excluded 74 patients for whom the primary end point could not be measured or who had delirium before the second day of the study. After these postrandomization exclusions, data for 378 patients were included in the main analysis. The overall mean age was 84 years, 238 (63.0%) of the patients lived at home before admission, and 210 (55.6%) had cognitive impairment. We observed no effect of melatonin on the incidence of delirium: 55/186 (29.6%) in the melatonin group v. 49/192 (25.5%) in the placebo group; difference 4.1 (95% confidence interval -0.05 to 13.1) percentage points. There were no between-group differences in mortality or in cognitive or functional outcomes at 3-month follow-up.

INTERPRETATION

In this older population with hip fracture, treatment with melatonin did not reduce the incidence of delirium.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Registry, NTR1576: MAPLE (Melatonin Against PLacebo in Elderly patients) study; www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=1576.

Treating an established episode of delirium in palliative care: expert opinion and review of the current evidence base with recommendations for future development

CONTEXT

Delirium is a highly prevalent complication in patients in palliative care settings, especially in the end-of-life context.

OBJECTIVES

To review the current evidence base for treating episodes of delirium in palliative care settings and propose a framework for future development.

METHODS

We combined multidisciplinary input from delirium researchers and other purposely selected stakeholders at an international delirium study planning meeting. This was supplemented by a literature search of multiple databases and relevant reference lists to identify studies regarding therapeutic interventions for delirium.

RESULTS

The context of delirium management in palliative care is highly variable. The standard management of a delirium episode includes the investigation of precipitating and aggravating factors followed by symptomatic treatment with drug therapy. However, the intensity of this management depends on illness trajectory and goals of care in addition to the local availability of both investigative modalities and therapeutic interventions. Pharmacologically, haloperidol remains the practice standard by consensus for symptomatic control. Dosing schedules are derived from expert opinion and various clinical practice guidelines as evidence-based data from palliative care settings are limited. The commonly used pharmacologic interventions for delirium in this population warrant evaluation in clinical trials to examine dosing and titration regimens, different routes of administration, and safety and efficacy compared with placebo.

CONCLUSION

Delirium treatment is multidimensional and includes the identification of precipitating and aggravating factors. For symptomatic management, haloperidol remains the practice standard. Further high-quality collaborative research investigating the appropriate treatment of this complex syndrome is needed.

Practical assessment of delirium in palliative care

CONTEXT

Delirium is a common, distressing neuropsychiatric complication for patients in palliative care settings, where the need to minimize burden yet accurately assess delirium is hugely challenging.

OBJECTIVES

This review focused on the optimal clinical and research application of delirium assessment tools and methods in palliative care settings.

METHODS

In addition to multidisciplinary input from delirium researchers and other relevant stakeholders at an international meeting, we searched PubMed (1990-2012) and relevant reference lists to identify delirium assessment tools used either exclusively or partly in the context of palliative care.

RESULTS

Of the 26 delirium scales identified, we selected six for in-depth review: three screening tools, two severity measures, and one research tool for neuropsychological assessment of delirium. These tools differed regarding intended use, ease of use, training requirements, psychometric properties, and validation in or suitability for palliative care populations. The Nursing Delirium Screening Scale, Single Question in Delirium, or Confusion Assessment Method, ideally with a brief attention test, can effectively screen for delirium. Favoring inclusivity, use of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV criteria gives the best results for delirium diagnosis. The Revised Delirium Rating Scale and the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale are the best available options for monitoring severity, and the Cognitive Test for Delirium provides detailed neuropsychological assessment for research purposes.

CONCLUSION

Given the unique characteristics of patients in palliative care settings, further contextually sensitive studies of delirium assessment are required in this population.

Delirium diagnostic and classification challenges in palliative care: subsyndromal delirium, comorbid delirium-dementia, and psychomotor subtypes

CONTEXT

Delirium often presents difficult diagnostic and classification challenges in palliative care settings.

OBJECTIVES

To review three major areas that create diagnostic and classification challenges in relation to delirium in palliative care: subsyndromal delirium (SSD), delirium in the context of comorbid dementia, and classification of psychomotor subtypes, and to identify knowledge gaps and research priorities in relation to these three areas of focus.

METHODS

We combined multidisciplinary input from delirium researchers and knowledge users at an international delirium study planning meeting and relevant PubMed literature searches as the knowledge synthesis strategy in this review.

RESULTS

We identified six (SSD), 33 (dementia), and 44 (psychomotor subtypes) articles of relevance in relation to the focus of our review. Recent literature data highlight the frequency and impact of SSD, the relevance of comorbid dementia, and the propensity for a hypoactive presentation of delirium in the palliative population. The differential diagnoses to consider are wide and include pain, fatigue, mood disturbance, psychoactive medication effects, and other causes for altered consciousness.

CONCLUSION

Challenges in the diagnosis and classification of delirium in people with advanced disease are compounded by the generalized disturbance of central nervous system function that occurs in the seriously ill, often with comorbid illness, including dementia. Further research is needed to delineate the pathophysiological and clinical associations of these presentations and thus inform therapeutic strategies. The expanding aged population and growing focus on dementia care in palliative care highlight the need to conduct this research.

A comparison of the revised Delirium Rating Scale (DRS-R98) and the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS) in a palliative care cohort with DSM-IV delirium

OBJECTIVE

Assessment of delirium is performed with a variety of instruments, making comparisons between studies difficult. A conversion rule between commonly used instruments would aid such comparisons. The present study aimed to compare the revised Delirium Rating Scale (DRS-R98) and Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS) in a palliative care population and derive conversion rules between the two scales.

METHOD

Both instruments were employed to assess 77 consecutive patients with DSM-IV delirium, and the measures were repeated at three-day intervals. Conversion rules were derived from the data at initial assessment and tested on subsequent data.

RESULTS

There was substantial overall agreement between the two scales [concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) = 0.70 (CI 95 = 0.60-0.78)] and between most common items (weighted κ ranging from 0.63 to 0.86). Although the two scales overlap considerably, there were some subtle differences with only modest agreement between the attention (weighted κ = 0.42) and thought process (weighted κ = 0.61) items. The conversion rule from total MDAS score to DRS-R98 severity scores demonstrated an almost perfect level of agreement (r = 0.86, CCC = 0.86; CI 95 = 0.79-0.91), similar to the conversion rule from DRS-R98 to MDAS.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Overall, the derived conversion rules demonstrated promising accuracy in this palliative care population, but further testing in other populations is certainly needed.

Family Caregivers' Knowledge of Delirium and Preferred Modalities for Receipt of Information

Delirium is a life-threatening, frequently reversible condition that is often a sign of an underlying health problem. In-hospital mortality alone for older adults with delirium ranges from 25% to 33%. Early recognition of delirium is critical because prolonged duration poses a greater risk of poor functional outcomes for older adults. Family caregivers, who are familiar with the older adult's usual behaviors, are most likely to recognize delirium symptoms but might dismiss them as due to aging. It is important to learn what family caregivers know about delirium to ascertain their need for education. The aims of this study were to describe family caregivers' knowledge of delirium and preferred modalities for receipt of information about delirium. A cross-sectional design was used for this study and a survey distributed to family caregivers for older adults. Analysis of 134 usable surveys indicated that family caregivers need and want information about delirium. The preferred modalities for receipt of information included Internet, in-person classes, and newsletters.

Delirium: definition, epidemiology, and diagnosis

This article serves to (1) review the relationship of the terms "delirium" and "encephalopathy," (2) describe delirium as defined in current diagnostic systems, (3) summarize the epidemiology and theories of pathogenesis, (4) review clinical diagnostic approaches, and (5) highlight the history using EEG in the study of delirium in the psychiatric literature. Delirium is an important medical syndrome with significant implications; there is continued need for better physiologic measures of the underlying brain dysfunction.

Development of an abbreviated version of the delirium motor subtyping scale (DMSS-4)

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a common neuropsychiatric syndrome with considerable heterogeneity in clinical profile. Identification of clinical subtypes can allow for more targeted clinical and research efforts. We sought to develop a brief method for clinical subtyping in clinical and research settings.

METHODS

A multi-site database, including motor symptom assessments conducted in 487 patients from palliative care, adult and old age consultation-liaison psychiatry services was used to document motor activity disturbances as per the Delirium Motor Checklist (DMC). Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to identify the class structure underpinning DMC data and also items for a brief subtyping scale. The concordance of the abbreviated scale was then compared with the original Delirium Motor Subtype Scale (DMSS) in 375 patients having delirium as per the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (4th edition) criteria.

RESULTS

Latent class analysis identified four classes that corresponded closely with the four recognized motor subtypes of delirium. Further, LCA of items (n = 15) that loaded >60% to the model identified four features that reliably identified the classes/subtypes, and these were combined as a brief motor subtyping scale (DMSS-4). There was good concordance for subtype attribution between the original DMSS and the DMSS-4 (κ = 0.63).

CONCLUSIONS

The DMSS-4 allows for rapid assessment of clinical subtypes in delirium and has high concordance with the longer and well-validated DMSS. More consistent clinical subtyping in delirium can facilitate better delirium management and more focused research effort.

[Pharmacological treatment of delirium in palliative care patients. A systematic literature review]

This systematic literature review aims to collect and analyse relevant clinical trials for the drug treatment of delirium in palliative care. The search was conducted including July 2012 in Medline (from 1966) and Embase (from 1974). The search retrieved 448 studies, of which 3 studies could be included in the analysis. Treatment with the antipsychotic drug haloperidol can be recommended, which is also true to a somewhat lower extent for the antipsychotics olanzapine and aripiprazole. Treatment with lorazepam only should be avoided. This literature analysis reflects the positive clinical experience, especially when using haloperidol. To confirm these recommendations, further substantial clinical studies are needed.The English full-text version of this article can be found at SpringerLink (under "Supplemental").

[Non-pharmacological steps for the treatment of acute confusional syndrome in the intensive care unit]

The incidence of delirium in intensive care units is high and it has been under-diagnosed and under-treated.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the experiences of ICU nurses in the identification and application of non-pharmacological treatments.

METHOD

A qualitative phenomenological research study was performed, based on focus groups.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

ICU nurses with one year of more of experience were included. Sample Purpose and snowball technique.

DATA COLLECTION

Data from the focus groups were transcribed for analysis and a thematic analysis of the texts was performed.

RESULTS

Four themes were identified: a) the physical and social structure of the ICU b) family involvement, c) need for training of health professionals, and d) encouraging the sleep-wake cycle.

CONCLUSIONS

It is necessary to control the ICU environment to make it more friendly, to change the routine work to promote relaxation, implement training activities and to make visiting hours flexible.

The epidemiology of delirium: challenges and opportunities for population studies

Delirium is a serious and common acute neuropsychiatric syndrome that is associated with short- and long-term adverse health outcomes. However, relatively little delirium research has been conducted in unselected populations. Epidemiologic research in such populations has the potential to resolve several questions of clinical significance in delirium. Part 1 of this article explores the importance of population selection, case-ascertainment, attrition, and confounding. Part 2 examines a specific question in delirium epidemiology: What is the relationship between delirium and trajectories of cognitive decline? This section assesses previous work through two systematic reviews and proposes a design for investigating delirium in the context of longitudinal cohort studies. Such a design requires robust links between community and hospital settings. Practical considerations for case-ascertainment in the hospital, as well as the necessary quality control of these programs, are outlined. We argue that attention to these factors is important if delirium research is to benefit fully from a population perspective.

What do we really know about the treatment of delirium with antipsychotics? Ten key issues for delirium pharmacotherapy

Despite the significant burden of delirium among hospitalized adults, no pharmacologic intervention is approved for delirium treatment. Antipsychotic agents are the best studied but there are uncertainties as to how these agents can be optimally applied in everyday practice. We searched Medline and PubMed databases for publications from 1980 to April 2012 to identify studies of delirium treatment with antipsychotic agents. Studies of primary prevention using pharmacotherapy were not included. We identified 28 prospective studies that met our inclusion criteria, of which 15 were comparison studies (11 randomized), 2 of which were placebo-controlled. The quality of comparison studies was assessed using the Jadad scale. The DRS (N = 12) and DRS-R98 (N = 9) were the most commonly used instruments for measuring responsiveness. These studies suggest that around 75% of delirious patients who receive short-term treatment with low-dose antipsychotics experience clinical response. Response rates appear quite consistent across different patient groups and treatment settings. Studies do not suggest significant differences in efficacy for haloperidol versus atypical agents, but report higher rates of extrapyramidal side effects with haloperidol. Comorbid dementia may be associated with reduced response rates but this requires further study. The available evidence does not indicate major differences in response rates between clinical subtypes of delirium. The extent to which therapeutic effects can be explained by alleviation of specific symptoms (e.g. sleep or behavioral disturbances) versus a syndromal effect that encompasses both cognitive and noncognitive symptoms of delirium is not known. Future research needs to explore the relationship between therapeutic effects and changes in pathophysiological markers of delirium. Less than half of reports were rated as reasonable quality evidence on the Jadad scale, highlighting the need for future studies of better quality design, and in particular incorporating placebo-controlled work.

[Delirium in elderly patients]

BACKGROUND

Delirium, «acute confusional state», is a frequent and serious complication of acute illness, particularly in the elderly. The strain on the patient, the next of kin and the health service is considerable. The purpose of the article is to provide healthcare personnel who deal with delirium with updated information about the condition.

METHOD

The article is based on a literature search in PubMed combined with articles from the author's own archives and own clinical experience.

RESULTS

Delirium is a serious acute medical condition that is often overlooked in the elderly. The prevalence is estimated to be between 11% and 42% for elderly patients on medical wards and close to 50% in patients with hip fractures. The prevalence is probably also high in nursing homes, but this is less well surveyed. Advanced age and dementia are the most important risk factors. Traumas, infections, stroke and metabolic disturbances are the most common triggering factors. The pathophysiology is poorly surveyed and the possibilities for drug treatment are few and are little studied. Delirium is associated with increased risk of dementia, loss of function and mortality. Short-term use of low-dosage antipsychotics is the first-line choice, but is contraindicated for patients with Parkinsonian symptoms.

INTERPRETATION

Detection and treatment of triggering causes must have high priority in case of delirium. Non-drug interventions are most important to prevent and treat the condition.

Implementing delirium screening in the ICU: secrets to success

OBJECTIVE

To review delirium screening tools available for use in the adult ICU and PICU, to review evidence-based delirium screening implementation, and to discuss common pitfalls encountered during delirium screening in the ICU.

DATA SOURCES

Review of delirium screening literature and expert opinion.

RESULTS

Over the past decade, tools specifically designed for use in critically ill adults and children have been developed and validated. Delirium screening has been effectively implemented across many ICU settings. Keys to effective implementation include addressing barriers to routine screening, multifaceted training such as lectures, case-based scenarios, one-on-one teaching, and real-time feedback of delirium screening, and interdisciplinary communication through discussion of a patient's delirium status during bedside rounds and through documentation systems. If delirium is present, clinicians should search for reversible or treatable causes because it is often multifactorial.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of effective delirium screening is feasible but requires attention to implementation methods, including a change in the current ICU culture that believes delirium is inevitable or a normal part of a critical illness, to a future culture that views delirium as a dangerous syndrome which portends poor clinical outcomes and which is potentially modifiable depending on the individual patients circumstances.

Efficacy and safety of haloperidol versus atypical antipsychotic medications in the treatment of delirium

BACKGROUND

Most previous studies on the efficacy of antipsychotic medication for the treatment of delirium have reported that there is no significant difference between typical and atypical antipsychotic medications. It is known, however, that older age might be a predictor of poor response to antipsychotics in the treatment of delirium. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of haloperidol versus three atypical antipsychotic medications (risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine) for the treatment of delirium with consideration of patient age.

METHODS

This study was a 6-day, prospective, comparative clinical observational study of haloperidol versus atypical antipsychotic medications (risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine) in patients with delirium at a tertiary level hospital. The subjects were referred to the consultation-liaison psychiatric service for management of delirium and were screened before enrollment in this study. A total of 80 subjects were assigned to receive either haloperidol (N = 23), risperidone (N = 21), olanzapine (N = 18), or quetiapine (N = 18). The efficacy was evaluated using the Korean version of the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-K) and the Korean version of the Mini Mental Status Examination (K-MMSE). The safety was evaluated by the Udvalg Kliniske Undersogelser side effect rating scale.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in mean DRS-K severity or K-MMSE scores among the four groups at baseline. In all groups, the DRS-K severity score decreased and the K-MMSE score increased significantly over the study period. However, there were no significant differences in the improvement of DRS-K or K-MMSE scores among the four groups. Similarly, cognitive and non-cognitive subscale DRS-K scores decreased regardless of the treatment group. The treatment response rate was lower in patients over 75 years old than in patients under 75 years old. Particularly, the response rate to olanzapine was poorer in the older age group. Fifteen subjects experienced a few adverse events, but there were no significant differences in adverse event profiles among the four groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Haloperidol, risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine were equally efficacious and safe in the treatment of delirium. However, age is a factor that needs to be considered when making a choice of antipsychotic medication for the treatment of delirium.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Research Information Service, Republic of Korea, (http://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/en/search/basic_search.jsp, Registered Trial No. KCT0000632).

Delirium prevalence, incidence, and implications for screening in specialist palliative care inpatient settings: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a serious neuropsychiatric syndrome frequently experienced by palliative care inpatients. This syndrome is under-recognized by clinicians. While screening increases recognition, it is not a routine practice.

AIM AND DESIGN

This systematic review aims to examine methods, quality, and results of delirium prevalence and incidence studies in palliative care inpatient populations and discuss implications for delirium screening.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search of the literature identified prospective studies reporting on delirium prevalence and/or incidence in inpatient palliative care adult populations from 1980 to 2012. Papers not in English or those reporting the occurrence of symptoms not specifically identified as delirium were excluded.

RESULTS

Of the eight included studies, the majority (98.9%) involved participants (1079) with advanced cancer. Eight different screening and assessment tools were used. Delirium incidence ranged from 3% to 45%, while delirium prevalence varied, with a range of: 13.3%-42.3% at admission, 26%-62% during admission, and increasing to 58.8%-88% in the weeks or hours preceding death. Studies that used the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-Fourth Edition reported higher prevalence (42%-88%) and incidence (40.2%-45%), while incidence rates were higher in studies that screened participants at least daily (32.8%-45%). Hypoactive delirium was the most prevalent delirium subtype (68%-86% of cases).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence and incidence of delirium in palliative care inpatient settings supports the need for screening. However, there is limited consensus on assessment measures or knowledge of implications of delirium screening for inpatients and families. Further research is required to develop standardized methods of delirium screening, assessment, and management that are acceptable to inpatients and families.

Delirium motor subtypes in elderly hip fracture patients: risk factors, outcomes and longitudinal stability

OBJECTIVE

Delirium is often accompanied by changes in motor activity but the longitudinal expression of these features and etiological and prognostic significance of clinical subtypes defined by motor activity is unclear.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study of elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Baseline characteristics were assessed preoperatively. During hospital admission presence of delirium was assessed daily according to CAM criteria. This study compared baseline characteristics and outcomes according to a longitudinal pattern of motor subtype expression (predominantly hyperactive, predominantly hypoactive, predominantly mixed, no motor subtype and variable). Motor subtype categorization was performed with the DRS-R98. We also investigated the longitudinal stability of motor subtypes across the delirium episode.

RESULTS

62 patients had experienced in-hospital delirium postoperatively. The full course of the delirium episode could be defined for 42/62 (67.7%) patients. Of the patients with multiple days of delirium only 4/30 (13.3%) patients had a consistent motor subtype profile throughout the delirium episode, while 26/30 (86.7%) patients had a variable course. Of the patients with multiple days of delirium, 5/30 (16.7%) were predominantly hypoactive in profile, 7/30 (23.3%) predominantly hyperactive, 6/30 (20%) predominantly mixed, 1/30 (3.3%) had no motor subtype and 11/30 (36.7%) had a variable profile. Baseline characteristics and outcomes did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The majority of elderly hip fracture patients in this homogenous sample experienced variable expression of motor subtype over the course of their delirium episodes. The subtype categorization according to dominant motor subtype across the delirium episode identified groups with similar characteristics and outcomes.

Replication analysis for composition of the Delirium Motor Subtype Scale (DMSS) in a referral cohort from Northern India

The Delirium Motor Subtype Scale (DMSS) was developed by discerning the best differentiating motor activity symptoms from the Delirium Motor Checklist (DMC), a compilation of psychomotor symptoms from other subjective scales. To broaden its validation we replicated the original work done in a palliative care population in a psychiatric referral population. 100 consecutive C/L Psychiatry referrals with DSM-IV delirium in an Indian general hospital were assessed with the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R98) and DMC and compared to 60 nondelirious hospitalized controls. Disturbances of motor activity were almost invariably present in patients with delirium and at a much higher frequency than in nondelirious control subjects. Principal components analysis identified 5-factors for the DMC where Factor 1 explained 37.3% of the variance and correlated significantly with DRS-R98 motor items. Items loading at >0.65 were selected for the replication scale if they also either correlated significantly with DRS-R98 motor items or were significantly more frequent in delirious patients vs. controls. The resultant scale comprised 12 items (five hyperactive and seven hypoactive) and was similar to the original DMSS. Combining motor items from the original DMSS and replicated version produced a 13-item amended DMSS that may have broader generalizability than the original DMSS.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of pain, agitation, and delirium in adult patients in the intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

To revise the "Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Sustained Use of Sedatives and Analgesics in the Critically Ill Adult" published in Critical Care Medicine in 2002.

METHODS

The American College of Critical Care Medicine assembled a 20-person, multidisciplinary, multi-institutional task force with expertise in guideline development, pain, agitation and sedation, delirium management, and associated outcomes in adult critically ill patients. The task force, divided into four subcommittees, collaborated over 6 yr in person, via teleconferences, and via electronic communication. Subcommittees were responsible for developing relevant clinical questions, using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method (http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org) to review, evaluate, and summarize the literature, and to develop clinical statements (descriptive) and recommendations (actionable). With the help of a professional librarian and Refworks database software, they developed a Web-based electronic database of over 19,000 references extracted from eight clinical search engines, related to pain and analgesia, agitation and sedation, delirium, and related clinical outcomes in adult ICU patients. The group also used psychometric analyses to evaluate and compare pain, agitation/sedation, and delirium assessment tools. All task force members were allowed to review the literature supporting each statement and recommendation and provided feedback to the subcommittees. Group consensus was achieved for all statements and recommendations using the nominal group technique and the modified Delphi method, with anonymous voting by all task force members using E-Survey (http://www.esurvey.com). All voting was completed in December 2010. Relevant studies published after this date and prior to publication of these guidelines were referenced in the text. The quality of evidence for each statement and recommendation was ranked as high (A), moderate (B), or low/very low (C). The strength of recommendations was ranked as strong (1) or weak (2), and either in favor of (+) or against (-) an intervention. A strong recommendation (either for or against) indicated that the intervention's desirable effects either clearly outweighed its undesirable effects (risks, burdens, and costs) or it did not. For all strong recommendations, the phrase "We recommend …" is used throughout. A weak recommendation, either for or against an intervention, indicated that the trade-off between desirable and undesirable effects was less clear. For all weak recommendations, the phrase "We suggest …" is used throughout. In the absence of sufficient evidence, or when group consensus could not be achieved, no recommendation (0) was made. Consensus based on expert opinion was not used as a substitute for a lack of evidence. A consistent method for addressing potential conflict of interest was followed if task force members were coauthors of related research. The development of this guideline was independent of any industry funding.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines provide a roadmap for developing integrated, evidence-based, and patient-centered protocols for preventing and treating pain, agitation, and delirium in critically ill patients.

Predicting delirium duration in elderly hip-surgery patients: does early symptom profile matter?

Background. Features that may allow early identification of patients at risk of prolonged delirium, and therefore of poorer outcomes, are not well understood. The aim of this study was to determine if preoperative delirium risk factors and delirium symptoms (at onset and clinical symptomatology during the course of delirium) are associated with delirium duration. Methods. This study was conducted in prospectively identified cases of incident delirium. We compared patients experiencing delirium of short duration (1 or 2 days) with patients who had more prolonged delirium (≥3 days) with regard to DRS-R-98 (Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98) symptoms on the first delirious day. Delirium symptom profile was evaluated daily during the delirium course. Results. In a homogenous population of 51 elderly hip-surgery patients, we found that the severity of individual delirium symptoms on the first day of delirium was not associated with duration of delirium. Preexisting cognitive decline was associated with prolonged delirium. Longitudinal analysis using the generalised estimating equations method (GEE) identified that more severe impairment of long-term memory across the whole delirium episode was associated with longer duration of delirium. Conclusion. Preexisting cognitive decline rather than severity of individual delirium symptoms at onset is strongly associated with delirium duration.

At the extreme end of the psychoneuroimmunological spectrum: delirium as a maladaptive sickness behaviour response

Delirium is a common and severe neuropsychiatric syndrome characterised by acute deterioration and fluctuations in mental status. It is precipitated mainly by acute illness, trauma, surgery, or drugs. Delirium affects around one in eight hospital inpatients and is associated with multiple adverse consequences, including new institutionalisation, worsening of existing dementia, and death. Patients with delirium show attentional and other cognitive deficits, altered alertness (mostly reduced, but some patients develop agitation and hyperactivity), altered sleep-wake cycle and psychoses. The pathways from the various aetiologies to the heterogeneous clinical presentations are hardly studied and are poorly understood. One of the key questions, which research is only now beginning to address, is how the factors determining susceptibility interact with the stimuli that trigger delirium. Inflammatory signals arising during systemic infection evoke sickness behaviour, a coordinated set of adaptive changes initiated by the host to respond to, and to counteract, infection. It is now clear that the same systemic inflammatory signals can have severe deleterious effects on brain function when occuring in old age or in the presence of neurodegenerative disease. Multiple animal studies now show that even mild acute systemic inflammation can induce exaggerated sickness behaviour responses and cognitive dysfunction in aged animals or those with prior degenerative pathology when compared to young and/or healthy controls. These findings appear highly promising in understanding aspects of delirium. In this review our aim is to describe and assess the parallels between exaggerated sickness behaviour in vulnerable animals and delirium in older humans. We discuss inflammatory and stress-related triggers of delirium in the context of new animal models that allow us to dissect some aspects of the mechanisms underpinning these episodes. We discuss some differences between the sickness behaviour syndrome model and delirium in the context of the complexity in the latter due to other factors such as prior pathology, psychological stress and drug effects. We conclude that, with appropriate caveats, the study of sickness behaviour in the vulnerable brain offers a promising route to uncover the mechanisms of this common and serious unmet medical need.

Drug therapy for delirium in terminally ill adult patients

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a syndrome characterised by a disturbance of consciousness (often fluctuating), cognition and perception. In terminally ill patients it is one of the most common causes of admission to clinical care. Delirium may arise from any number of causes and treatment should be directed at addressing these causes rather than the symptom cluster. In cases where this is not possible, or treatment does not prove successful, the use of drug therapy to manage the symptoms may become necessary. This is an update of the review published on 'Drug therapy for delirium in terminally ill adult patients' in The Cochrane Library 2004, Issue 2 ( Jackson 2004).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of drug therapies to treat delirium in adult patients in the terminal phase of a disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1966 to 2012), EMBASE (1980 to 2012), CINAHL (1982 to 2012) and PSYCINFO (1990 to 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Prospective trials with or without randomisation or blinding involving the use of drug therapies for the treatment of delirium in adult patients in the terminal phase of a disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality using standardised methods and extracted trial data. We collected outcomes related to efficacy and adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

One trial met the criteria for inclusion. In the 2012 update search we retrieved 3066 citations but identified no new trials. The included trial evaluated 30 hospitalised AIDS patients receiving one of three agents: chlorpromazine, haloperidol and lorazepam. The trial under-reported key methodological features. It found overall that patients in the chlorpromazine group and those in the haloperidol group had fewer symptoms of delirium at follow-up (to below the diagnostic threshold using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III) and that both were equally effective (at two days mean difference (MD) 0.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.58 to 5.32; between two and six days MD -0.21; 95% CI -5.35 to 4.93). Chlorpromazine and haloperidol were found to be no different in improving cognitive status in the short term (at 48 hours) but at subsequent follow-up cognitive status was reduced in those taking chlorpromazine. Improvements from baseline to day two for patients randomised to lorazepam were not apparent. All patients on lorazepam (n = 6) developed adverse effects, including oversedation and increased confusion, leading to trial drug discontinuation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There remains insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about the role of drug therapy in the treatment of delirium in terminally ill patients. Thus, practitioners should continue to follow current clinical guidelines. Further research is essential.

Comprehensive approaches to managing delirium in patients with advanced cancer

Delirium is a frequently under-recognized complication in patients with advanced cancer. Uncontrolled delirium eventually leads to significant distress to patients and their families. However, delirium episodes can be reversed in half of these patients by eliminating precipitating factors and using appropriate interventions. The purpose of this narrative review is to discuss the most recent updates in the literature on the management of delirium in patients with advanced cancer. This article addresses the epidemiology, cause, pathophysiology, clinical characteristics, and assessment of delirium as well as various treatment options, including nonpharmacologic intervention and palliative sedation.

Delirium in elderly people: a review

The present review aims to highlight this intricate syndrome, regarding diagnosis, pathophysiology, etiology, prevention, and management in elderly people. The diagnosis of delirium is based on clinical observations, cognitive assessment, physical, and neurological examination. Clinically, delirium occurs in hyperactive, hypoactive, or mixed forms, based on psychomotor behavior. As an acute confusional state, it is characterized by a rapid onset of symptoms, fluctuating course and an altered level of consciousness, global disturbance of cognition or perceptual abnormalities, and evidence of a physical cause. Although pathophysiological mechanisms of delirium remain unclear, current evidence suggests that disruption of neurotransmission, inflammation, or acute stress responses might all contribute to the development of this ailment. It usually occurs as a result of a complex interaction of multiple risk factors, such as cognitive impairment/dementia and current medical or surgical disorder. Despite all of the above, delirium is frequently under-recognized and often misdiagnosed by health professionals. In particular, this happens due to its fluctuating nature, its overlap with dementia and the scarcity of routine formal cognitive assessment in general hospitals. It is also associated with multiple adverse outcomes that have been well documented, such as increased hospital stay, function/cognitive decline, institutionalization and mortality. In this context, the early identification of delirium is essential. Timely and optimal management of people with delirium should be performed with identification of any possible underlying causes, dealing with a suitable care environment and improving education of health professionals. All these can be important factors, which contribute to a decrease in adverse outcomes associated with delirium.

A longitudinal study of motor subtypes in delirium: frequency and stability during episodes

OBJECTIVE

Motor-defined subtypes are a promising means of identifying clinically relevant patient subgroups but little is known about their course and stability during a delirium episode.

METHODS

We assessed 100 consecutive adult palliative care patients with DSM-IV delirium twice weekly during their episodes using the Delirium Motor Subtype Scale (DMSS), Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R98) and Cognitive Test for Delirium (CTD). DMSS subtypes were assigned for each assessment and analysed for stability within patients during episodes.

RESULTS

Across all assessments (n=303; mean 3 per patient, range 2-9), subtype occurrence was hypoactive (35%), mixed (26%), hyperactive (15%) and no subtype (24%). "No subtype" was associated with significantly lower DRS-R98 severity scores, of which 80% were subsyndromal, whereas mixed subtype assessments were the most impaired on the DRS-R98 and CTD. Subtypes were stable within delirium episodes in 62% of patients: 29% hypoactive, 18% mixed, 10% hyperactive and 6% no-subtype. The DRS-R98 noncognitive subscale scores differed across groups whereas cognitive subscale scores did not (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that motor subtypes occur in nearly all patients with full syndromal delirium and are often stable during an episode. Subtypes exhibited comparable levels of cognitive impairment but differed in non-cognitive symptoms, supporting the importance of cognitive testing to detect delirium in less overt cases.