The delirium experience: delirium recall and delirium-related distress in hospitalized patients with cancer, their spouses/caregivers, and their nurses

"You've got to keep moving, keep going": Understanding older patients' experiences and perceptions of delirium and nonpharmacological delirium prevention strategies in the acute hospital setting

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To explore older inpatients' experiences and perceptions of delirium and nonpharmacological delirium prevention strategies (NDPS).

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a distressing and serious complication in hospitalised older adults. NDPS (supporting nutrition, mobility and cognitive participation) have strong supporting evidence. Few studies have explored older inpatients' perspectives of these strategies. This information may assist staff to better support patient participation in NDPS.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using an interpretive descriptive (ID) methodological approach to explore older patient's experience of delirium and NDPS.

METHODS

Structured interviews of inpatients aged over 65 years across 6 medical and surgical wards explored patients' experiences and perceptions of delirium and prevention activities related to nutrition, mobility and cognition; and barriers and enablers to participation. Reporting used COREQ.

RESULTS

Twenty-three participants were included (12 male, 11 reported delirium experience). Participants reported a range of physiological, emotional and psychological responses to delirium, hearing about delirium was different to experiencing it. Most participants were aware of the benefits of maintaining nutrition and hydration, physical activity and cognitive engagement in hospital. Barriers included poor symptom control, inflexible routines and inconsistent communication, whilst enablers included access to equipment, family involvement, staff encouragement and individual goals. These were organised into themes: outlook, feeling well enough, hospital environment, feeling informed and listened to, and support networks.

CONCLUSION

A more patient-centred approach to delirium prevention requires consideration of older people's values, needs, preferences and fit within the hospital environment and routines. Feeling informed, listened to and receiving support from staff and family carers can improve older inpatients' engagement in NPDS to prevent delirium in hospital.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Nurses are ideally placed to improve patient participation in NDPS through holistic assessment and care, addressing symptoms, providing clear information about delirium and delirium prevention, and facilitating family carer support and patient interactions.

Olanzapine Versus Haloperidol for Treatment of Delirium in Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Phase III Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment of delirium often includes haloperidol. Second-generation antipsychotics like olanzapine have emerged as an alternative with possibly fewer side effects. The aim of this multicenter, phase III, randomized clinical trial was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of olanzapine with haloperidol for the treatment of delirium in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eligible adult patients (≥18 years) with advanced cancer and delirium (Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 [DRS-R-98] total score ≥17.75) were randomized 1:1 to receive either haloperidol or olanzapine (age-adjusted, titratable doses). Primary endpoint was delirium response rate (DRR), defined as number of patients with DRS-R-98 severity score <15.25 and ≥4.5 points reduction. Secondary endpoints included time to response (TTR), tolerability, and delirium-related distress.

RESULTS

Between January 2011 and June 2016, 98 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. DRR was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI], 31-59) for olanzapine and 57% (95% CI, 43-71) for haloperidol (Δ DRR -12%; odds ratio [OR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.2-1.4; p = .23). Mean TTR was 4.5 days (95% CI, 3.2-5.9 days) for olanzapine and 2.8 days (95% CI, 1.9-3.7 days; p = .18) for haloperidol. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 5 patients (10.2%) and 10 patients (20.4%) in the olanzapine and haloperidol arm, respectively. Distress rates were similar in both groups. The study was terminated early because of futility.

CONCLUSION

Delirium treatment with olanzapine in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer did not result in improvement of DRR or TTR compared with haloperidol. Clinical trial identification number. NCT01539733. Dutch Trial Register. NTR2559.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Guidelines recommend that pharmacological interventions for delirium treatment in adults with cancer should be limited to patients who have distressing delirium symptoms. It was suggested that atypical antipsychotics, such as olanzapine, outperform haloperidol in efficacy and safety. However, collective data comparing the efficacy and safety of typical versus atypical antipsychotics in patients with cancer are limited. If targeted and judicious use of antipsychotics is considered for the treatment of delirium in patients with advanced cancer, this study demonstrated that there was no statistically significant difference in response to haloperidol or olanzapine. Olanzapine showed an overall better safety profile compared with haloperidol, although this difference was not statistically significant.

Preliminary investigation of predictors of distress in informal caregivers of patients with delirium superimposed on dementia

OBJECTIVE

Delirium superimposed on dementia (DSD) is common and associated with adverse outcomes. Current evidence indicates that some patients with dementia may recall delirium with distress for them and their caregivers. The aim of this study is to identify predictors of distress in informal caregivers of older patient with DSD.

METHODS

A total of 33 caregivers of 33 patients with DSD were interviewed 3 days after the resolution of delirium (T0) and at 1-month follow-up (T1) to describe their level of distress related to the delirium episode. A linear regression was used to identify predictors of caregivers' distress at T0 and T1 defined a priori: age, sex, level of education, employment status, delirium subtypes, delirium severity, type and severity of dementia, and the time spent with the patient during the delirium episode.

RESULTS

Caregivers were mostly female (81%), 59 (± 13.0) years old on average. The predictors of distress at T0 were the patient's severity of both dementia and delirium. Moderate dementia was associated with lower distress, whereas higher delirium severity was associated with greater distress. At 1-month follow-up, the predictors of distress were the age of caregiver and time spent in care; the distress level was higher when caregivers were older, and they spent less time with their loved one.

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary findings underline the importance of providing continuous training and support for the caregivers, especially in coping strategies, in order to improve the care of DSD patients and prevent the caregivers' distress in long time period.

Distress in delirium: causes, assessment and management

Purpose

Delirium is a common clinical syndrome associated with increased physical and psychological morbidity, mortality, inpatient stay and healthcare costs. There is growing interest in understanding the delirium experience and its psychological impact, including distress, for patients and their relatives, carers and healthcare providers.

Methods

This narrative review focuses on distress in delirium (DID) with an emphasis on its effect on older patients. It draws on qualitative and quantitative research to describe patient and environmental risk factors and variations in DID across a number of clinical settings, including medical and surgical inpatient wards and end of life care. The article provides an overview of the available distress assessment tools, both for clinical and research practice, and outlines their use in the context of delirium. This review also outlines established and emerging management strategies, focusing primarily on prevention and limitation of distress in delirium.

Results

Both significant illness and delirium cause distress. Patients who recall the episode of delirium describe common experiential features of delirium and distress. Relatives who witness delirium also experience distress, at levels suggested to be greater than that experienced by patients themselves. DID results in long-term psychological sequelae that can last months and years. Preventative actions, such pre-episode educational information for patients and their families in those at risk may reduce distress and psychological morbidity.

Conclusions

Improving clinicians’ understanding of the experience and long term psychological harm of delirium will enable the development of targeted support and information to patients at risk of delirium, and their families or carers.

Reversibility of delirium in Ill-hospitalized cancer patients: Does underlying etiology matter?

Background

The objective of this study was to explore the underlying etiologies associated with the resolution and improvement of delirium in ill‐hospitalized cancer patients.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of a multicenter, prospective, observational study to estimate the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for delirium. Participants were cancer patients with delirium. We assessed the Delirium Rating Scale, Revised‐98 (DRS‐R98) severity scale score at baseline and three days after pharmacotherapy initiation. Delirium resolution was defined as a DRS‐R98 severity scale score ≤9, and improvement was defined as ≥50% reduction at Day 3.

Results

We enrolled 566 patients (491 patients had performance status of 3 or 4). The resolution and improvement rates in all patients were 22.6% and 19.3%, respectively. Univariate analysis determined that nonrespiratory infection (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.38‐3.45) was significantly associated with greater resolution, while dehydration (0.40, 0.19‐0.87), organic damage to the central nervous system (CNS) (0.32, 0.43‐0.72), hypoxia (0.25, 0.12‐0.52), and hyponatremia (0.34, 0.12‐0.97) were significantly associated with no resolution. Potential causes associated with delirium improvement were nonrespiratory infection (1.93, 1.19‐3.13), organic damage to the CNS (0.40, 0.18‐1.90), and hypoxia (0.32, 0.16‐0.65). After multivariate analysis, dehydration (0.34, 0.15‐0.76), organic damage to the CNS (0.25, 0.10‐0.60), and hypoxia (0.29, 0.14‐0.61) were significantly associated with no resolution.

Conclusions

Delirium caused by nonrespiratory infection may be reversible, while delirium associated with dehydration, organic damage to the CNS, hypoxia, or hyponatremia seems to be irreversible in ill‐hospitalized cancer patients.

What do geriatric patients experience during an episode of delirium in acute care hospitals? : A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Predispositions and triggers for delirium, such as noxious agents are known and behavior can be monitored; however, there is little to no information available regarding the experience of patients during delirium episodes. Not much is known about a person's world of experiences, which therefore mostly remains as a sort of black box.

OBJECTIVE

This study was motivated by the following question: "What do (Austrian) geriatric patients experience during an episode of delirium in an acute care hospital?" The main objective of this article is to present little snippets from the experiences and to allow geriatric patients to speak for themselves.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 2013 to 2016 interviews were carried out within the framework of a qualitative investigation. For data collection narrative interviews according to Fritz Schütze were employed and 10 interviews were conducted in a hospital setting with German-speaking Austrian patients aged between 75 and 90 years (mean age 80.2 years; 7 female and 3 male). The individual interviews lasted between 60 and 120 min. Primary data in the form of individual interpretation and interpretation groups from interview transcripts were marked and coded according to Mayring.

RESULTS

All patients who participated in the interviews subjectively recognized delirium as a negative experience. The data analysis led to three main categories with subcategories: changes in sensory perception, extraordinarily strong emotions and memories. It is important to differentiate between two very different types of memories: firstly, personal fate or life changes and secondly, those regarding experiences of war.

CONCLUSION

Scandinavian and Anglo-American literature describe different categories, such as a change in reality, strong emotions and dramatic episodes in the experience of delirium, which can be transferred to Austria. Others consider the biography of each individual patient in context with the sociocultural history of Austria, especially following developments after 1940.

A qualitative study of nursing staff experiences of delirium in the hospice setting

BACKGROUND:

Delirium is a common condition occurring in 13-42% of people admitted to palliative care units and up to 88% of these patients are at the end of their lives. It is frequently unrecognised and distressing to all those affected-patients, families and health professionals. In addition, there is considerable uncertainty surrounding its trajectory and optimal management, both of which can be inconsistent.

AIMS:

This study aims to explore the experience of nursing staff who are caring for patients with delirium in the hospice environment and understand any potential barriers to its management.

METHODS:

Semistructured interviews using emotional touchpoints were conducted with 12 nurses and six healthcare assistants in three hospices in North East England. Data was analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis.

FINDINGS:

The results highlighted gaps in knowledge and understanding in the management of delirium. The results demonstrated delirium had significant emotional effects, which were associated with uncertainty in managing the condition and the impact of this uncertainty on the relationship between staff and patients.

CONCLUSION:

This study highlights the emotional impact of caring for patients with delirium. Future work is needed to address the areas of uncertainty identified and ascertain how to best support nursing staff in these challenges.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the ICU

OBJECTIVE

To update and expand the 2013 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium in Adult Patients in the ICU.

DESIGN

Thirty-two international experts, four methodologists, and four critical illness survivors met virtually at least monthly. All section groups gathered face-to-face at annual Society of Critical Care Medicine congresses; virtual connections included those unable to attend. A formal conflict of interest policy was developed a priori and enforced throughout the process. Teleconferences and electronic discussions among subgroups and whole panel were part of the guidelines' development. A general content review was completed face-to-face by all panel members in January 2017.

METHODS

Content experts, methodologists, and ICU survivors were represented in each of the five sections of the guidelines: Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption). Each section created Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome, and nonactionable, descriptive questions based on perceived clinical relevance. The guideline group then voted their ranking, and patients prioritized their importance. For each Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome question, sections searched the best available evidence, determined its quality, and formulated recommendations as "strong," "conditional," or "good" practice statements based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation principles. In addition, evidence gaps and clinical caveats were explicitly identified.

RESULTS

The Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) panel issued 37 recommendations (three strong and 34 conditional), two good practice statements, and 32 ungraded, nonactionable statements. Three questions from the patient-centered prioritized question list remained without recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

We found substantial agreement among a large, interdisciplinary cohort of international experts regarding evidence supporting recommendations, and the remaining literature gaps in the assessment, prevention, and treatment of Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) in critically ill adults. Highlighting this evidence and the research needs will improve Pain, Agitation/sedation, Delirium, Immobility (mobilization/rehabilitation), and Sleep (disruption) management and provide the foundation for improved outcomes and science in this vulnerable population.

Supratherapeutic Psychotropic Drug Levels in the Emergency Department and Their Association with Delirium Duration: A Preliminary Study

OBJECTIVES

Polypharmacy is associated with delirium, but the mechanisms for this connection are unclear. Our goal was to determine the frequency of supratherapeutic psychotropic drug levels (SPDLs) in older hospitalized patients and if it is associated with the duration of emergency department (ED) delirium.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary care academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

ED patients 65 years or older who were admitted to the hospital.

MEASUREMENTS

Delirium was assessed in the ED and during the first 7 days of hospitalization using the modified Brief Confusion Assessment Method. Drug concentrations were determined in serum samples collected at enrollment via a novel platform based on liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry capable of identifying and quantitating 78 clinically approved medications including opioids, benzodiazepines, antidepressants, antipsychotics, and amphetamines. Patients with serum psychotropic drug concentrations above established reference ranges were considered supratherapeutic and have a SPDL. We performed proportional odds logistic regression to determine if SPDLs were associated with ED delirium duration adjusted for confounders. Medical record review was performed to determine if the doses of medications associated with SPDLs were adjusted at hospital discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 158 patients were enrolled; of these, 66 were delirious in the ED. SPDLs were present in 11 (17%) of the delirious and 4 (4%) of the non-delirious ED patients. SPDLs were significantly associated with longer ED delirium duration (adjusted proportional odds ratio = 6.0; 95% confidence interval = 2.1-17.3) after adjusting for confounders. Of the 15 medications associated with SPDLs, 9 (60%) were prescribed at the same or higher doses at the time of hospital discharge.

CONCLUSION

SPDLs significantly increased the odds of prolonged ED delirium episodes. Approximately half of the medications associated with SPDLs were continued after hospital discharge at the same or higher doses. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2387-2392, 2019.

Perspectives on the Delirium Experience and Its Burden: Common Themes Among Older Patients, Their Family Caregivers, and Nurses

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

While there are qualitative studies examining the delirium-related experiences of patients, family caregivers, and nurses separately, little is known about common aspects of delirium burden among all three groups. We describe common delirium burdens from the perspectives of patients, family caregivers, and nurses.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews about delirium burden with 18 patients who had recently experienced a delirium episode, with 16 family caregivers, and with 15 nurses who routinely cared for patients with delirium. We recruited participants from a large, urban teaching hospital in Boston, Massachusetts. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. We used interpretive description as the approach to data analysis.

RESULTS

We identified three common burden themes of the delirium experience: Symptom Burden (Disorientation, Hallucinations/Delusions, Impaired Communication, Memory Problems, Personality Changes, Sleep Disturbances); Emotional Burden (Anger/Frustration, Emotional Distress, Fear, Guilt, Helplessness); and Situational Burden (Loss of Control, Lack of Attention, Lack of Knowledge, Lack of Resources, Safety Concerns, Unpredictability, Unpreparedness). These burdens arise from different sources among patients, family caregivers, and nurses, with markedly differing perspectives on the burden experience.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Our findings advance the understanding of common burdens of the delirium experience for all groups and offer structure for instrument development and distinct interventions to address the burden of delirium as an individual or group experience. Our work reinforces that no one group experiences delirium in isolation. Delirium is a shared experience that will respond best to systemwide approaches to reduce associated burden.

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) related symptoms following an experience of delirium

AIM

To evaluate the prevalence of symptoms of PTSD and its correlates after 2 weeks of recovery, among patients, who developed delirium.

METHODOLOGY

A prospective study designed was followed, in which subjects diagnosed with delirium were evaluated 2 weeks after resolution of symptoms of delirium, for PTSD symptoms by using Impact of Events Scale-Revised version (IES-R).

RESULTS

59 patients were evaluated for PTSD 2 weeks after resolution of delirium and the total mean IES-R score was 27.81 (SD-11.41). Based on the IES-cut-off scores of the scale, 30.5% of the patients (n = 18) were considered to have substantial symptoms of PTSD, 22% (n = 13) had probable symptoms of PTSD and 15.3% were considered to have partial symptoms of PTSD after resolution of delirium. None of the demographic or clinical factors were associated with development of PTSD. Those with PTSD symptoms had significantly higher prevalence of fluctuation of symptoms, while experiencing delirium and had significantly higher mean scores for the items of motor agitation, attentional deficits, higher total severity score on the Delirium Rating Scale-revised-98 version (DRS-R98) and higher DRS-R-98 total score. Higher severity of delirium as indicated by the total DRS-R98 score and the total DRS-R98 severity score were associated with higher severity of PTSD symptoms. The IES-R total score did not have any significant correlation with duration of illness, duration of delirium or Charlson Co-morbidity index.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that about one-third of patients who develop delirium go on to develop symptoms of PTSD, after recovery from delirium. Development of PTSD symptoms is associated with severity of delirium. Hence, it is important to treat the delirium adequately and provide psychological support to the patients who develop delirium, after recovery from delirium.

Development of a Tool for the Assessment of Nurses' Attitudes Toward Delirium

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The prevalence of delirium during hospitalization is high in older patients and there is evidence of staff regarding them as unpopular or a burden. This study aims to develop an instrument examining nurses' attitudes toward patients with delirium.

METHODS

Stages included (a) content identification, (b) content development, (c) content critique, (e) pilot study with a test-retest reliability, (f) field study consisting of psychometric testing of the internal consistency and construct validity.

RESULTS

The Cronbach's alpha was 0.89 and the stability reliability was acceptable. The factor analysis resulted in three factors explaining a total of 56.5% of the variance. hese factors are "beliefs," "behavior," and "emotions," explaining 37.025%, 12.792%, and 5.652% of variance.

CONCLUSIONS

The Attitude Tool of Delirium (ATOD) is a reliable and valid instrument for the assessment of attitudes toward delirium.

Measuring the distress related to delirium in older surgical patients and their relatives

OBJECTIVES

Delirium is a common postoperative complication with implications on morbidity and mortality. Less is known about the psychological impact of delirium in patients and relatives. This study aimed to quantitatively describe distress related to postoperative delirium in older surgical patients and their relatives using the distress thermometer, examine the association between degree of distress and features of delirium on the Delirium Rating Scale (DRS), and examine the association between recall of delirium and features of delirium on the DRS.

METHODS

This prospective study recruited postoperative patients and their relatives following delirium. The distress thermometer was used to examine the degree of distress pertaining to delirium and was conducted during the hospitalization on resolution of delirium and then at 12-month follow-up. Associations between delirium-related distress in patient and relative participants and severity and features of delirium (DRS) were examined.

RESULTS

One hundred two patients and 49 relatives were recruited. Median scores on the distress thermometer in patients who recalled delirium were 8/10. Relatives also showed distress (median distress thermometer score of 8/10). Associations were observed between severity and phenotypic features of delirium (delusions, labile affect, and agitation). Distress persisted at 12 months in patients and relatives.

CONCLUSION

Distress related to postoperative delirium can be measured using a distress thermometer. Alongside approaches to reduce delirium incidence, interventions to minimize distress from postoperative delirium should be sought. Such interventions should be developed through robust research and if effective administered to patients, relatives, or carers.

Delirium after emergency hip surgery – common and serious, but rarely consented for

A quarter of patients admitted with a proximal femoral fracture suffer from an acute episode of delirium during their hospital stay. Yet it is often unrecognised, poorly managed, and rarely discussed by doctors. Delirium is important not only to the affected individuals and their families, but also socioeconomically to the broader community. Delirium increases mortality and morbidity, leads to lasting cognitive and functional decline, and increases both length of stay and dependence on discharge. Delirium should be routinely and openly discussed by all members of the clinical team, including surgeons when gaining consent. Failing to do so may expose surgeons to claims of negligence. Here we present a concise review of the literature and discuss the epidemiology, causative factors, potential consequences and preventative strategies in the perioperative period.

Don't go there - It's not a nice place: Older adults' experiences of delirium

Delirium is a common neuropsychiatric disorder that causes fluctuations in consciousness and attention, impairments in cognitive functioning and information processing, and changes in how individuals perceive what is going on around them. Delirium is associated with increased mortality, ongoing impairment in cognitive functioning, and a high possibility of discharge to residential care. The experience of delirium may be distressing for the patient and their family. Despite the frequency of delirium in hospitalized elderly patients, there is a dearth of literature that examines their experience of this phenomenon, and how it affects individuals as they continue their lives. This study uses descriptive qualitative methodology to explore the question: 'What is the experience of delirium for older adults during hospitalisation?' Data were collected from older adults who had received hospital care in a tertiary general hospital setting. Seven participants were recruited between January and June 2017. Semi-structured individual interviews were used to gather data which was analysed using content analysis. Four themes were identified. These were sense of confusion, disrupted sense of autonomy, perceptual disturbances, and emotional response. Participants exercised agency in the way they responded to these experiences. The study highlighted the need for delirium prevention, and education to improve nurses' recognition, understanding, and management of delirium. In particular, there is a need for nurses to attend to the psychological and emotional experience of delirium.

A Scoping Review to Map Empirical Evidence Regarding Key Domains and Questions in the Clinical Pathway of Delirium in Palliative Care

CONTEXT

Based on the clinical care pathway of delirium in palliative care (PC), a published analytic framework (AF) formulated research questions in key domains and recommended a scoping review to identify evidence gaps.

OBJECTIVES

To produce a literature map for key domains of the published AF: screening, prognosis and diagnosis, management, and the health-related outcomes.

METHODS

A standard scoping review framework was used by an interdisciplinary study team of nurse- and physician-delirium researchers, an information specialist, and review methodologists to conduct the review. Knowledge user engagement provided context in refining 19 AF questions. A peer-reviewed search strategy identified citations in Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL databases between 1980 and 2018. Two reviewers independently screened records for inclusion using explicit study eligibility criteria for the population, design, delirium diagnosis, and investigational intent.

RESULTS

Of 104 studies reporting empirical data and meeting eligibility criteria, most were conducted in patients with cancer (73.1%) and in inpatient PC units (52%). The most frequent study design was a one or more group, nonrandomized trial or cohort (67.3%). Evidence gaps were identified: delirium risk prediction; comparative effectiveness and harms of prevention, variability in delirium management across PC settings, advanced directive and substitute decision-maker input, and transition of care location; and estimating delirium reversibility. Future rigorous primary studies are required to address these gaps and preliminary concerns regarding the quality of extant literature.

CONCLUSION

Substantial evidence gaps exist, providing opportunities for future research regarding the assessment, prognosis, and management of delirium in PC settings.

Assessment of Instruments for Measurement of Delirium Severity: A Systematic Review

Importance

Measurement of delirium severity has been recognized as highly important for tracking prognosis, monitoring response to treatment, and estimating burden of care for patients both during and after hospitalization. Rather than simply rating delirium as present or absent, the ability to quantify its severity would enable development and monitoring of more effective treatment approaches for the condition.

Objectives

To present a comprehensive review of delirium severity instruments, conduct a methodologic quality rating of the original validation study of the most commonly used instruments, and select a group of top-rated instruments.

Evidence Review

This systematic review was conducted using literature from Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, from January 1, 1974, through March 31, 2017, with the key words delirium, severity, tests, measures, and intensity. Inclusion criteria were original articles assessing delirium severity and using a delirium-specific severity instrument. Final listings of articles were supplemented with hand searches of reference listings to ensure completeness. At least 2 reviewers independently completed each step of the review process: article selection, data extraction, and methodologic quality assessment of relevant articles using a validated rating scale. All discrepancies between raters were resolved by consensus.

Findings

Of 9409 articles identified, 228 underwent full text review, and we identified 42 different instruments of delirium severity. Eleven of the 42 tools were multidomain, delirium-specific instruments providing a quantitative rating of delirium severity; these instruments underwent a methodologic quality review. Applying prespecified criteria related to frequency of use, methodologic quality, construct or predictive validity, and broad domain coverage, an expert panel used an iterative modified Delphi process to select 6 final high-quality instruments meeting these criteria: the Confusion Assessment Method-Severity Score, Confusional State Examination, Delirium-O-Meter, Delirium Observation Scale, Delirium Rating Scale, and Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale.

Conclusions and Relevance

The 6 instruments identified may enable accurate measurement of delirium severity to improve clinical care for patients with this condition. This work may stimulate increased usage and head-to-head comparison of these instruments.

Clinical Assessment and Management of Delirium in the Palliative Care Setting

Delirium is a neurocognitive syndrome arising from acute global brain dysfunction, and is prevalent in up to 42% of patients admitted to palliative care inpatient units. The symptoms of delirium and its associated communicative impediment invariably generate high levels of patient and family distress. Furthermore, delirium is associated with significant patient morbidity and increased mortality in many patient populations, especially palliative care where refractory delirium is common in the dying phase. As the clinical diagnosis of delirium is frequently missed by the healthcare team, the case for regular screening is arguably very compelling. Depending on its precipitating factors, a delirium episode is often reversible, especially in the earlier stages of a life-threatening illness. Until recently, antipsychotics have played a pivotal role in delirium management, but this role now requires critical re-evaluation in light of recent research that failed to demonstrate their efficacy in mild- to moderate-severity delirium occurring in palliative care patients. Non-pharmacological strategies for the management of delirium play a fundamental role and should be optimized through the collective efforts of the whole interprofessional team. Refractory agitated delirium in the last days or weeks of life may require the use of pharmacological sedation to ameliorate the distress of patients, which is invariably juxtaposed with increasing distress of family members. Further evaluation of multicomponent strategies for delirium prevention and treatment in the palliative care patient population is urgently required.

Current Pharmacotherapy Does Not Improve Severity of Hypoactive Delirium in Patients with Advanced Cancer: Pharmacological Audit Study of Safety and Efficacy in Real World (Phase-R)

BACKGROUND

Pharmacotherapy is generally recommended to treat patients with delirium. We sought to describe the current practice, effectiveness, and adverse effects of pharmacotherapy for hypoactive delirium in patients with advanced cancer, and to explore predictors of the deterioration of delirium symptoms after starting pharmacotherapy.

SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS

We included data of patients with advanced cancer who were diagnosed with hypoactive delirium and received pharmacotherapy for treatment of delirium. This was a pharmacovigilance study characterized by prospective registries and systematic data-recording using internet technology, conducted among 38 palliative care teams and/or units. The severity of delirium and other outcomes were assessed using established measures at days 0 (T0), 3 (T1), and 7 (T2).

RESULTS

Available data were obtained from 218 patients. The most frequently used agent was haloperidol (37%). A total of 67 and 42 patients (31% and 19%) had died or discontinued pharmacotherapy by T1 and T2, respectively. Delirium symptoms deteriorated between T0 and T1, but this trend did not reach statistical significance. The most prevalent adverse event was sedation (9%). Delirium severity worsened after starting pharmacotherapy in 121 patients (56%) at T1. In patients whose death was expected within a few days and those with delirium caused by organ failure, symptoms of delirium were significantly more likely to deteriorate after starting pharmacotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Current pharmacotherapy for hypoactive delirium in patients with advanced cancer is not recommended, especially in those whose death is expected within a few days and in those with delirium caused by organ failure.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Delirium is common among patients with advanced cancer, and hypoactive delirium is the dominant motor subtype in the palliative care setting. Pharmacotherapy is recommended and regularly used to treat delirium. This article describes the effectiveness and adverse effects of pharmacotherapy for hypoactive delirium in patients with advanced cancer. The findings of this study do not support the use of pharmacotherapy for treatment of hypoactive delirium in the palliative care setting. Pharmacotherapy should especially be avoided in patients whose death is expected within a few days and in those with delirium caused by organ failure.

Managing the Mental Distress of the Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant (HSCT) Patient: a Focus on Delirium

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To highlight the breadth and types of mental distress experienced by hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients and highlight the need for better prevention and management of delirium.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent publications highlight additional risks factors which predict for mental distress during the HSCT process. Despite new medications and additional psychological reports, there is little progress in non-pharmacologic or medication therapy in the prevention and treatment of delirium. Mental distress, especially delirium, is common during the HSCT process. The morbidity associated with delirium and other mental distress can still be significant at 6-12 months after the completion of the procedure affecting patient functioning and quality of life (QOL). Medication interventions may be helpful but should be used sparingly for targeted patients during HSCT. Additional interventions are needed to prevent and treat delirium in HSCT patients.

Neuroleptic Prescription Pattern for Delirium in Patients with Advanced Cancer

Background: Neuroleptics are frequently used by palliative care specialists to treat delirium. In this study, we determined the median daily neuroleptic dose and prescription pattern in a cohort of unselected advanced cancer in-patients with delirium. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 100 consecutive patients admitted to our acute palliative care unit with delirium for demographics, delirium characteristics, and neuroleptic use during the first five days of delirium. The dose of neuroleptics was expressed using the concept of haloperidol equivalent daily dose (HEDD). Results: The median delirium duration was six days, and the median Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale on day 1 was 13/30. Subtypes of delirium in cluded hypoactive (31 percent), mixed (59 percent), and hyperactive (10 percent). Haloperidol, olanzapine, and chlorpromazine were given to 94 (94 percent), 8 (8 percent), and 5 (5 percent) of patients, respectively. The median five-day average HEDD was 3.2 mg (interquartile range 1.5–6.0 mg). HEDD was not associated with any clinical characteristics except delirium subtype. Among the 31 occasions in which ≥3 breakthrough doses were given in a day, only 9 (29 percent) resulted in an increase in the scheduled neuroleptic dose, and 1 (3 percent) resulted in the addition of a new neuroleptic the next day. Among the 73 patients with ≥4 days of delirium, only 49 (67 percent) had an increase in the neuroleptic dose, and 2 (3 percent) had a new neuroleptic added. Conclusion: HEDD was lower than doses reported in previous studies involving cancer patients and was adjusted sparingly. Prospective clinical trials are necessary to identify the optimal neuroleptic dose for delirium.

Delirium in Advanced Cancer Leading to Distress in Patients and Family Caregivers

Background: Information is limited about the experiences of delirium among patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers, which makes designing interventions to relieve delirium-related distress difficult. To better understand the experience and thus permit the design of effective interventions, we collected and analyzed data from patients with advanced cancer who had recovered from delirium and their family caregivers. Method: Phenomenolog-ical interviews were conducted separately with 37 caregivers and 34 patients. One investigator reviewed verbatim transcripts of the audio-taped interviews to identify themes, which the research team confirmed. Results: Most patients and all caregivers had vivid memories of the experience; their descriptions were consistent. Most also attributed the confusion to pain medication. Caregivers had concerns about how best to help patients, patients’ imminent deaths, and their own well-being. Conclusions: The main finding that delirium leads to distress for both patients and care-givers indicates the importance of recognizing, treating, and, if possible, preventing delirium in this population. Concerns about pain medications also indicate the need to educate patients and caregivers about symptom management. Caregivers also need emotional support.

Benzodiazepines for agitation in patients with delirium: selecting the right patient, right time, and right indication

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an evidence-based synopsis on the role of benzodiazepines in patients with agitated delirium.

RECENT FINDINGS

Existing evidence supports the use of benzodiazepines in two specific delirium settings: persistent agitation in patients with terminal delirium and delirium tremens. In the setting of terminal delirium, the goal of care is to maximize comfort, recognizing that patients are unlikely to recover from their delirium. A recent randomized trial suggests that lorazepam in combination with haloperidol as rescue medication was more effective than haloperidol alone for the management of persistent restlessness/agitation in patients with terminal delirium. In patients with refractory agitation, benzodiazepines may be administered as scheduled doses or continuous infusion for palliative sedation. Benzodiazepines also have an established role in management of delirium secondary to alcohol withdrawal. Outside of these two care settings, the role of benzodiazepine remains investigational and clinicians should exercise great caution because of the risks of precipitating or worsening delirium and over-sedation.

SUMMARY

Benzodiazepines are powerful medications associated with considerable risks and benefits. Clinicians may prescribe benzodiazepines skillfully by selecting the right medication at the right dose for the right indication to the right patient at the right time.

Debate article: Antipsychotic medications are clinically useful for the treatment of delirium

Prescribing of antipsychotic medications for patients with delirium remains controversial. Concerns exist that these vulnerable and frail patients may be prescribed antipsychotics inappropriately as a substitute for non-pharmacological approaches when identifiable causes are not found or they challenge ward processes. Moreover, recent evidence suggests that antipsychotics may cause more harm than good in the palliative care patient group with delirium. On the other hand, guidelines in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands support prescribing of antipsychotics in certain circumstances, and a large European survey has revealed that antipsychotics tend to be prescribed first line for hyperactive delirium. Never before, therefore, is there a greater need to examine whether indeed these medications are clinically useful for the treatment of delirium. With this in mind, evidence-based arguments for and against prescribing antipsychotics for the treatment of delirium are presented in this debate article. The paper concludes with a moderation piece to help guide clinical practice.

The neuropsychology of delirium: advancing the science of delirium assessment

OBJECTIVE

The diagnosis of delirium depends on eliciting its features through mental status examination and informant history. However, there is marked heterogeneity in how these features are assessed, from binary subjective clinical judgement to more comprehensive methods supported by cognitive testing. The aim of this article is to review the neuropsychological research in delirium and suggest future directions in research and clinical practice.

METHODS

We reviewed the neuropsychological literature on formal assessment and quantification of the different domains in delirium, focusing on the core feature of inattention.

RESULTS

Few studies have characterised and quantified the features of delirium using objective methods commonly employed in neuropsychological research. The existing evidence confirms that patients with delirium usually show impairments on objective tests of attention compared with cognitively intact controls and, in most cases, compared with patients with dementia. Further, abnormal level of arousal appears to be a specific indicator of delirium. The neuropsychological evidence base for impairments in other cognitive domains in delirium, including visual perception, language and thought processes, is small.

CONCLUSIONS

Delirium diagnosis requires accurate testing for its features, but there is little neuropsychological research examining the nature of these features, or evaluating the reliability, validity and discriminatory power of existing assessment processes. More research using the neuropsychological approach has enormous potential to improve and standardise delirium assessment methods of the individual features of delirium, such as inattention, and in developing more robust reference standards to enable greater comparability between studies.

TIME to think about delirium: improving detection and management on the acute medical unit

Delirium affects 18%–35% patients in the acute hospital setting, yet is often neither detected nor managed appropriately. It is associated with increased risk of falls, longer hospital stay and increased morbidity and mortality rates. It is a frightening and unpleasant experience for both patients and their families. We used quality improvement tools and a multicomponent intervention to promote detection and improve management of delirium on the acute medical unit (AMU). We reviewed whether a delirium screening tool (4AT) had been completed for all patients aged over 65 years admitted to the AMU over 1 week. If delirium was detected, we assessed whether investigation and management was adequate as per national guidance. After baseline data collection, we delivered focused sessions of delirium education for doctors and nursing staff, including training on use of the 4AT tool and the TIME (Triggers, Investigate, Manage, Engage) management bundle. We introduced TIME checklists, an online delirium order set and created a bedside orientation tool. We collected data following the interventions and identified areas for further improvement. Following our first PDSA (Plan, Do, Study, Act) cycle, use of the 4AT screening tool improved from 40% to 61%. Adequate assessment for the causes of and exacerbating factors for delirium increased from 73% to 94% of cases. Use of personal orientation tools improved from 0% to 38%. In summary, a targeted staff education programme and practical aids for the ward have improved the screening and management of delirium on the AMU. This may be improved further through more frequent training sessions to account for regular change-over of junior doctors and through implementing a nursing champion for delirium.

What effect does delirium have on family and nurses of older adult patients?

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to analyse the level of distress caused by delirium in patients' family and their nurses, and to identify factors associated with psychological distress in families of older adult inpatients in Intermediate Care Units/IMCUs regarding their global experience during hospitalization.

METHOD

A prospective pilot study was carried out with families and nurses of older adult patients (≥65 y.o.) consecutively recruited from two IMCUs in Intensive Care Medicine Service in a University Hospital. Patients with Glasgow Coma Scale ≤11, brain injury, blindness/deafness and inability to communicate were excluded. Delirium was daily assessed with Confusion Assessment Method/CAM. The distress level regarding this episode in family and nurses was measured with Delirium Experience Questionnaire/DEQ. Family psychological distress of all recruited patients was assessed with Kessler Psychological Distress Scale/K10.

RESULTS

This study included 42 inpatients (mean age/MA = 78 y.o., 50% women), 32 families (68.8% sons/daughters, MA = 50.6 y.o., 81.3% women) and 12 nurses caring for delirium patients (MA = 33 y.o., all women). A total of 12 (28.6%) patients had delirium. Distress related to this episode were higher for families than for nurses (M = 3 vs. M = 2), but differences did not reach statistical significance (Z = -1.535, p = 0.125). The hierarchical regression model explained 44.3% of variability in family psychological distress. Higher levels of psychological distress were associated with living with the patient (p = 0.029), presence of previous cognitive decline (p = 0.048) and development of delirium (p = 0.010).

CONCLUSION

These preliminary results show that family psychological distress is higher, when older adult patients developed delirium during hospitalization. Particular attention to these family carers should be given in future development of psychological support and psychoeducational interventions.

Antipsychotics for treatment of delirium in hospitalised non-ICU patients

BACKGROUND

Guidelines suggest limited and cautious use of antipsychotics for treatment of delirium where nonpharmacological interventions have failed and symptoms remain distressing or dangerous, or both. It is unclear how well these recommendations are supported by current evidence.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to assess the efficacy of antipsychotics versus nonantipsychotics or placebo on the duration of delirium in hospitalised adults. Our secondary objectives were to compare the efficacy of: 1) antipsychotics versus nonantipsychotics or placebo on delirium severity and resolution, mortality, hospital length of stay, discharge disposition, health-related quality of life, and adverse effects; and 2) atypical vs. typical antipsychotics for reducing delirium duration, severity, and resolution, hospital mortality and length of stay, discharge disposition, health-related quality of life, and adverse effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane EBM Reviews, CINAHL, Thomson Reuters Web of Science and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) from their respective inception dates until July 2017. We also searched the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Assessment Database, Web of Science ISI Proceedings, and other grey literature.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing 1) antipsychotics to nonantipsychotics or placebo and 2) typical to atypical antipsychotics for the treatment of delirium in adult hospitalised (but not critically ill) patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We examined titles and abstracts of identified studies to determine eligibility. We extracted data independently in duplicate. Disagreements were settled by further discussion and consensus. We used risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) as a measure of treatment effect for dichotomous outcomes, and between-group standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine trials that recruited 727 participants. Four of the nine trials included a comparison of an antipsychotic to a nonantipsychotic drug or placebo and seven included a comparison of a typical to an atypical antipsychotic. The study populations included hospitalised medical, surgical, and palliative patients.No trial reported on duration of delirium. Antipsychotic treatment did not reduce delirium severity compared to nonantipsychotic drugs (standard mean difference (SMD) -1.08, 95% CI -2.55 to 0.39; four studies; 494 participants; very low-quality evidence); nor was there a difference between typical and atypical antipsychotics (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.02; seven studies; 542 participants; low-quality evidence). There was no evidence antipsychotics resolved delirium symptoms compared to nonantipsychotic drug regimens (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.98; three studies; 247 participants; very low-quality evidence); nor was there a difference between typical and atypical antipsychotics (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.52; five studies; 349 participants; low-quality evidence). The pooled results indicated that antipsychotics did not alter mortality compared to nonantipsychotic regimens (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.27; three studies; 319 participants; low-quality evidence) nor was there a difference between typical and atypical antipsychotics (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.82 to 3.35; four studies; 342 participants; low-quality evidence).No trial reported on hospital length of stay, hospital discharge disposition, or health-related quality of life. Adverse event reporting was limited and measured with inconsistent methods; in those reporting events, the number of events were low. No trial reported on physical restraint use, long-term cognitive outcomes, cerebrovascular events, or QTc prolongation (i.e. increased time in the heart's electrical cycle). Only one trial reported on arrhythmias and seizures, with no difference between typical or atypical antipsychotics. We found antipsychotics did not have a higher risk of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) compared to nonantipsychotic drugs (RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.04 to 65.57; three studies; 247 participants; very-low quality evidence); pooled results showed no increased risk of EPS with typical antipsychotics compared to atypical antipsychotics (RR 12.16, 95% CI 0.55 to 269.52; two studies; 198 participants; very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There were no reported data to determine whether antipsychotics altered the duration of delirium, length of hospital stay, discharge disposition, or health-related quality of life as studies did not report on these outcomes. From the poor quality data available, we found antipsychotics did not reduce delirium severity, resolve symptoms, or alter mortality. Adverse effects were poorly or rarely reported in the trials. Extrapyramidal symptoms were not more frequent with antipsychotics compared to nonantipsychotic drug regimens, and no different for typical compared to atypical antipsychotics.

Delirium symptoms are associated with decline in cognitive function between ages 53 and 69 years: Findings from a British birth cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Few population studies have investigated whether longitudinal decline after delirium in mid-to-late life might affect specific cognitive domains.

METHODS

Participants from a birth cohort completing assessments of search speed, verbal memory, and the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination at age 69 were asked about delirium symptoms between ages 60 and 69 years. Linear regression models estimated associations between delirium symptoms and cognitive outcomes.

RESULTS

Period prevalence of delirium between 60 and 69 years was 4% (95% confidence interval 3.2%-4.9%). Self-reported symptoms of delirium over the seventh decade were associated with worse scores in the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (-1.7 points; 95% confidence interval -3.2, -0.1; P = .04). In association with delirium symptoms, verbal memory scores were initially lower, with subsequent decline in search speed by the age of 69 years. These effects were independent of other Alzheimer's risk factors.

DISCUSSION

Delirium symptoms may be common even at relatively younger ages, and their presence may herald cognitive decline, particularly in search speed, over this time period.

Delirium clinical motor subtypes: a narrative review of the literature and insights from neurobiology

INTRODUCTION

Clinical motor subtypes have been long recognised in delirium and, despite a growing body of research, a lack of clarity exists regarding the importance of these motor subtypes. The aims of this review are to (1) examine how the concept of motor subtypes has evolved, (2) explore their relationship to the clinical context, (3) discuss the relationship between the phenomenology of delirium and motor activity, (4) discuss the application of neurobiology to the theory of delirium motor subtypes, and (5) identify methodological issues and provide solutions for further studies.

METHODS

The following databases were searched: PubMed, PsychInfo, EBSCO, Medline, BioMed central and Science Direct. Inclusion criteria specified peer-reviewed research assessing delirium motor subtypes published between 1990 and 2016.

RESULTS

Sixty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies (n = 50) were found to use validated psychometric tools, while the remainder (n = 11) used clinical criteria. The majority of studies (n = 45) were conducted in the medical setting, while the remainder were in the ICU/post-operative setting (n = 17).

CONCLUSION

Although host sensitivities (e.g. frailty) and exogenous factors (e.g. medication exposure) may determine the type of motor disturbance, it remains unclear to what extent motor subtypes are influenced by other features of delirium. The use of more specialised tools (e.g. delirium motor subtyping scale), may enable researchers to develop an approach to delirium that has a greater nosological consistency. Future studies investigating delirium motor subtypes may benefit from enhanced theoretical considerations of the dysfunctional neural substrate of the delirious state.

Relational ethics of delirium care: Findings from a hospice ethnography

Delirium, a common syndrome in terminally ill people, presents specific challenges to a good death in end-of-life care. This paper examines the relational engagement between hospice nurses and their patients in a context of end-of-life delirium. Ethnographic fieldwork spanning 15 months was conducted at a freestanding residential hospice in eastern Canada. A shared value system was apparent within the nursing community of hospice; patients' comfort and dignity were deemed most at stake and therefore commanded nurses' primary attention. This overarching commitment to comfort and dignity shaped all of nursing practice in this hospice, including practices related to end-of-life delirium. The findings of this study elaborate the ways in which hospice nurses interpreted and responded to the discomfort of their patients in delirium, as well as the efforts they made to understand their patients' subjective experiences and to connect with them in supportive ways. In addition to what is already known about clinical assessment and treatment of delirium in palliative care settings, the findings of this study offer points of reflection for nurses anywhere who are contending with the relational challenges that delirium presents in end-of-life care.

The Diagnostic Sensitivity of the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale-Spanish Version

BACKGROUND

Although Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS) is a successful tool for delirium evaluation and monitoring, it is nevertheless important to determine whether cutoff scores vary according to the studied population. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic sensitivity of the recently validated Spanish version of the MDAS. The secondary objective was to analyze possible diagnostic differences when used in a hospice or general hospital setting.

METHODOLOGY

A prospective study was conducted with advanced cancer patients in two settings (hospice and general hospital). A diagnosis of delirium was established according to clinical criteria and the Confusion Assessment Method. Sensitivity (S), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were determined according to the receiver operating characteristics curve. The MDAS values for different centers were studied using nonparametric tests (Mann-Whitney).

RESULTS

A total of 67 patients were included, 28 of whom had been diagnosed with delirium (15/40 hospice and 13/27 general hospital). The mean MDAS scores were 13.6 and 5.5 for the delirium and nondelirium groups, respectively. A cutoff score of 7 gave the optimal screening diagnosis balance (S 92.6%, Sp 71.8%, positive predictive value 70.1%, and negative predictive value 93.3%). Diagnoses of anxiety and depression were not related with delirium (P ≤ 0.44). A diagnosis of dementia was related to delirium (P ≤ 0.052) but did not influence the diagnostic sensitivity of MDAS (P ≤ 0.26). No differences were found between hospice and general hospital settings as regards the diagnostic sensitivity of MDAS.

CONCLUSION

A screening cutoff of 7 appears to be optimal for MDAS Spanish version. No differences were found between advanced cancer patients cared for in a hospice or general hospital. However, more research is required to define the MDAS cutoff for patients with advanced cancer and dementia.

Early detection and successful treatment of Wernicke's encephalopathy in outpatients without the complete classic triad of symptoms who attended a psycho-oncology clinic

Objective

Wernicke's encephalopathy (WE) is a neuropsychiatric disorder caused by a thiamine deficiency. Although WE has been recognized in cancer patients, it can be overlooked because many patients do not exhibit symptoms that are typical of WE, such as delirium, ataxia, or ocular palsy. Furthermore, outpatients with WE who intermittently present at psycho-oncology clinics have not been described as far as we can ascertain.

Method

This report describes two patients who did not exhibit the complete classic triad of symptoms among a series with cancer and WE, and who attended a psycho-oncology outpatient clinic.

Result

Case 1, a 76-year-old woman with pancreatic cancer and liver metastasis, periodically attended a psycho-oncology outpatient clinic. She presented with delirium and ataxia as well as appetite loss that had persisted for 8 weeks. We suspected WE, which was confirmed by low serum thiamine levels and the disappearance of delirium after thiamine administration. Case 2, a 79-year-old man with advanced stomach cancer, was referred to a psycho-oncology outpatient clinic with depression that had persisted for about 1 month. He also had appetite loss that had persisted for several weeks. He became delirious during the first visit to the outpatient clinic. Our initial suspicion of WE was confirmed by low serum thiamine levels and the disappearance of delirium after thiamine administration. The key indicator of a diagnosis of WE in both patients was appetite loss.

Significance of results

This report emphasizes awareness of WE in the outpatient setting, even when patients do not exhibit the classical triad of WE. Appetite loss might be the key to a diagnosis of WE in the absence of other causes of delirium.

Neuroleptics in the management of delirium in patients with advanced cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Delirium is the most common and distressing neuropsychiatric syndrome in cancer patients. Few evidence-based treatment options are available due to the paucity of high quality of studies. In this review, we shall examine the literature on the use of neuroleptics to treat delirium in patients with advanced cancer. Specifically, we will discuss the randomized controlled trials that examined neuroleptics in the front line setting, and studies that explore second-line options for patients with persistent agitation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Contemporary management of delirium includes identification and management of any potentially reversible causes, coupled with nonpharmacological approaches. For patients who do not respond adequately to these measures, pharmacologic measures may be required. Haloperidol is often recommended as the first-line treatment option, and other neuroleptics such as olanzapine, risperidone, and quetiapine represent potential alternatives. For patients with persistent delirium despite first-line neuroleptics, the treatment strategies include escalating the dose of the same neuroleptic, rotation to another neuroleptic, or combination therapy (i.e., the addition of a second neuroleptic or other agent). We will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each approach, and the available evidence to support each strategy.

SUMMARY

Adequately powered, randomized trials involving proper control interventions are urgently needed to define the optimal treatment strategies for delirium in the oncology setting.

Psychological and psychiatric symptoms of terminally ill patients with cancer and their family caregivers in the home-care setting: A nation-wide survey from the perspective of bereaved family members in Japan

OBJECTIVE

The psychological and psychiatric symptoms of terminally ill cancer patients are highly problematic and have been associated with greater burden among caregivers. Until now, the extent of these problems in the home care setting was unclear.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted as part of a nationwide survey from the perspective of bereaved family members in Japan (J-HOPE3). The bereaved family members rated the symptoms of delirium and suicidal ideation of patients with cancer, and the sleeplessness and depressed mood of family caregivers utilizing home care services in the one month before the patients' deaths. Regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with caregivers' sleeplessness or depressed mood.

RESULTS

Of the 532 subjects analyzed, between 17% and 65% of patients experienced various symptoms of delirium, and 27% suicidal ideation. Among family caregivers, 60% experienced sleeplessness and 35% experienced depressed mood at least once during the week. Caregivers' psychological symptoms were associated with their own poor health status, being the spouse of the patient, and the patients' psychological or psychiatric symptoms. To manage patients' symptoms, 11% of caregivers had consulted psychiatrists or psychologists while another 11% wanted to do so.

CONCLUSION

Psychological problems assessed were common among patients with cancer and their family caregivers in the one month of home care prior to the patient's death. An effective complementary care system, run by home-visit physicians, nurses, and experts in mental disorders, is needed.

Delirium in Hospitalized Children with Cancer: Incidence and Associated Risk Factors

OBJECTIVE

To assess the incidence of delirium and its risk factors in hospitalized children with cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

In this cohort study, all consecutive admissions to a pediatric cancer service over a 3-month period were prospectively screened for delirium twice daily throughout their hospitalization. Demographic and treatment-related data were collected from the medical record after discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 319 consecutive admissions, including 186 patients and 2731 hospital days, were included. Delirium was diagnosed in 35 patients, for an incidence of 18.8%. Risk factors independently associated with the development of delirium included age <5 years (OR = 2.6, P = .026), brain tumor (OR = 4.7, P = .026); postoperative status (OR = 3.3, P = .014), and receipt of benzodiazepines (OR = 3.7,P < .001). Delirium was associated with increased hospital length of stay, with median length of stay for delirious patients of 10 days compared with 5 days for patients who were not delirious during their hospitalization (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort, delirium was a frequent complication during admissions for childhood cancer, and was associated with increased hospital length of stay. Multi-institutional prospective studies are warranted to further characterize delirium in this high-risk population and identify modifiable risk factors to improve the care provided to hospitalized children with cancer.

Acute Brain Failure: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, Management, and Sequelae of Delirium

Delirium is the most common psychiatric syndrome found in the general hospital setting, with an incidence as high as 87% in the acute care setting. Delirium is a neurobehavioral syndrome caused by the transient disruption of normal neuronal activity secondary to systemic disturbances. The development of delirium is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, cost of care, hospital-acquired complications, placement in specialized intermediate and long-term care facilities, slower rate of recovery, poor functional and cognitive recovery, decreased quality of life, and prolonged hospital stays. This article discusses the epidemiology, known etiological factors, presentation and characteristics, prevention, management, and impact of delirium.

A person-centred approach in medicine to reduce the psychosocial and existential burden of chronic and life-threatening medical illness

The psychiatric, psychosocial, and existential/spiritual pain determined by chronic medical disorders, especially if in advanced stages, have been repeatedly underlined. The right to approach patients as persons, rather than symptoms of organs to be repaired, has also been reported, from Paul Tournier to Karl Jaspers, in opposition and contrast with the technically-enhanced evidence-based domain of sciences that have reduced the patients to 'objects' and weakened the physician's identity deprived of its ethical value of meeting, listening, and treating subjects. The paper will discuss the main psychosocial and existential burden related to chronic and advanced medical illnesses, and the diagnostic and therapeutic implications for a dignity preserving care within a person-centred approach in medicine, examined in terms of care of the person (of the person's whole health), for the person (for the fulfilment of the person's health aspirations), by the person (with physicians extending themselves as total human beings), and with the person (working respectfully with the medically ill person).

Effect of Lorazepam With Haloperidol vs Haloperidol Alone on Agitated Delirium in Patients With Advanced Cancer Receiving Palliative Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The use of benzodiazepines to control agitation in delirium in the last days of life is controversial.

Objective

To compare the effect of lorazepam vs placebo as an adjuvant to haloperidol for persistent agitation in patients with delirium in the setting of advanced cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Single-center, double-blind, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial conducted at an acute palliative care unit at MD Anderson Cancer Center, Texas, enrolling 93 patients with advanced cancer and agitated delirium despite scheduled haloperidol from February 11, 2014, to June 30, 2016, with data collection completed in October 2016.

Interventions

Lorazepam (3 mg) intravenously (n = 47) or placebo (n = 43) in addition to haloperidol (2 mg) intravenously upon the onset of an agitation episode.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was change in Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) score (range, -5 [unarousable] to 4 [very agitated or combative]) from baseline to 8 hours after treatment administration. Secondary end points were rescue neuroleptic use, delirium recall, comfort (perceived by caregivers and nurses), communication capacity, delirium severity, adverse effects, discharge outcomes, and overall survival.

Results

Among 90 randomized patients (mean age, 62 years; women, 42 [47%]), 58 (64%) received the study medication and 52 (90%) completed the trial. Lorazepam + haloperidol resulted in a significantly greater reduction of RASS score at 8 hours (-4.1 points) than placebo + haloperidol (-2.3 points) (mean difference, -1.9 points [95% CI, -2.8 to -0.9]; P < .001). The lorazepam + haloperidol group required less median rescue neuroleptics (2.0 mg) than the placebo + haloperidol group (4.0 mg) (median difference, -1.0 mg [95% CI, -2.0 to 0]; P = .009) and was perceived to be more comfortable by both blinded caregivers and nurses (caregivers: 84% for the lorazepam + haloperidol group vs 37% for the placebo + haloperidol group; mean difference, 47% [95% CI, 14% to 73%], P = .007; nurses: 77% for the lorazepam + haloperidol group vs 30% for the placebo + haloperidol group; mean difference, 47% [95% CI, 17% to 71%], P = .005). No significant between-group differences were found in delirium-related distress and survival. The most common adverse effect was hypokinesia (3 patients in the lorazepam + haloperidol group [19%] and 4 patients in the placebo + haloperidol group [27%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this preliminary trial of hospitalized patients with agitated delirium in the setting of advanced cancer, the addition of lorazepam to haloperidol compared with haloperidol alone resulted in a significantly greater reduction in agitation at 8 hours. Further research is needed to assess generalizability and adverse effects.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01949662.

Clinical Assessment and Management of Delirium in the Palliative Care Setting

Delirium is a neurocognitive syndrome arising from acute global brain dysfunction, and is prevalent in up to 42% of patients admitted to palliative care inpatient units. The symptoms of delirium and its associated communicative impediment invariably generate high levels of patient and family distress. Furthermore, delirium is associated with significant patient morbidity and increased mortality in many patient populations, especially palliative care where refractory delirium is common in the dying phase. As the clinical diagnosis of delirium is frequently missed by the healthcare team, the case for regular screening is arguably very compelling. Depending on its precipitating factors, a delirium episode is often reversible, especially in the earlier stages of a life-threatening illness. Until recently, antipsychotics have played a pivotal role in delirium management, but this role now requires critical re-evaluation in light of recent research that failed to demonstrate their efficacy in mild- to moderate-severity delirium occurring in palliative care patients. Non-pharmacological strategies for the management of delirium play a fundamental role and should be optimized through the collective efforts of the whole interprofessional team. Refractory agitated delirium in the last days or weeks of life may require the use of pharmacological sedation to ameliorate the distress of patients, which is invariably juxtaposed with increasing distress of family members. Further evaluation of multicomponent strategies for delirium prevention and treatment in the palliative care patient population is urgently required.

Validity of the Delirium Observation Screening Scale in Identifying Delirium in Home Hospice Patients

BACKGROUND

Delirium is common in home hospice patients and conveys significant morbidity to both patients and caregivers. The Delirium Observation Screening Scale (DOS) was developed to improve delirium recognition but has yet to be validated in the home hospice setting.

OBJECTIVE

This pilot study aimed to explore the accuracy of the DOS for identifying delirium in home hospice patients.

DESIGN

Prospective delirium evaluation using a convenience sample.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Community hospice patients were approached for study inclusion.

MEASUREMENTS

Participants were assessed using the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R-98), with results being categorized as "delirium" or "no delirium." The Delirium Observation Screening Scale scores, completed by hospice nurses during weekly patient assessment visits, were compared to the DRS-R-98 results.

RESULTS

Within this population, 30/78 (38%) assessments were categorized as delirious. In the majority of assessments, 69/75 (92%), the DRS-R-98 and DOS provided congruent results. There were 5 false positives and 1 false negative, demonstrating the DOS to be a clinically useful tool with a sensitivity of 0.97 and specificity of 0.89.

CONCLUSION

The DOS appears to be an accurate way to screen for delirium in home hospice patients. Validation of the DOS may help to improve delirium recognition and treatment and has the potential to increase quality of life in this vulnerable population. This input will also be taken into consideration in the development of a systematic screening procedure for delirium diagnosis at our local hospice, which we hope will be generalizable to other hospice agencies.

Referral criteria for outpatient specialty palliative cancer care: an international consensus

Although outpatient specialty palliative-care clinics improve outcomes, there is no consensus on who should be referred or the optimal timing for referral. In response to this issue, we did a Delphi study to develop consensus on a list of criteria for referral of patients with advanced cancer at secondary or tertiary care hospitals to outpatient palliative care. 60 international experts (26 from North America, 19 from Asia and Australia, and 11 from Europe) on palliative cancer care rated 39 needs-based criteria and 22 time-based criteria in three iterative rounds. Nearly all experts responded in each round. Consensus was defined by an a-priori agreement of 70% or more. Panellists reached consensus on 11 major criteria for referral: severe physical symptoms, severe emotional symptoms, request for hastened death, spiritual or existential crisis, assistance with decision making or care planning, patient request for referral, delirium, spinal cord compression, brain or leptomeningeal metastases, within 3 months of advanced cancer diagnosis for patients with median survival of 1 year or less, and progressive disease despite second-line therapy. Consensus was also reached on 36 minor criteria for specialist palliative-care referral. These criteria, if validated, could provide guidance for identification of patients suitable for outpatient specialty palliative care.

Accuracy of oncologist assessments of psychiatric problems in cancer inpatients

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to examine the accuracy of non-psychiatrist assessments of psychiatric problems in cancer patients.

METHOD

We conducted a retrospective chart review of cancer patients who were admitted and referred to the consultation-liaison (C-L) team between January of 2011 and December of 2012. The agreement between non-psychiatrist assessments and final diagnoses by attending C-L psychiatrists was estimated for every category of referral assessment using codes from the International Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders (10th revision). The data were obtained from the consultation records of 240 cancer inpatients who were referred to the C-L service at a tertiary care center in Tokyo.

RESULTS

The agreement ratio between referring oncologists and psychiatrists differed according to the evaluation categories. The degrees of agreement for the categories of "delirious," "depressive," "dyssomnia," "anxious," "demented," "psychotic," and "other" were 0.87, 0.43, 0.51, 0.50, 0.27, 0.55, and 0.57, respectively. The agreement for all patients was 0.65. Significant differences were observed among seven categories (chi-squared value = 42.454 at p < 0.001 and df = 6). The analysis of means for proportions showed that the degree of agreement for the "delirious" category was significantly higher and that that for the "depressive" category was lower than that for all patients, while for the "demented" category it was close to the lower decision limit but barely significant. One half of the 20 cases who were referred as depressive were diagnosed with delirium, with one quarter of those having continuously impaired consciousness. Some 7 of the 11 cases who were referred as demented were diagnosed as having delirium.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

The accuracy of non-psychiatrist assessments for psychiatric problems in cancer patients differs by presumed diagnosis. Oncologists should consider unrecognized delirium in cancer inpatients who appear depressed or demented.

Feasibility of melatonin for prevention of delirium in critically ill patients: a protocol for a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled study

INTRODUCTION

Delirium is highly prevalent in the intensive care unit (ICU) and is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. At this time, there is no drug that effectively prevents delirium in critically ill patients. Alterations in melatonin secretion and metabolism may contribute to the development of delirium. Administration of exogenous melatonin has been shown to prevent delirium in non-critically ill surgical and medical patients. This trial will demonstrate the feasibility of a planned multicentre, randomised controlled trial to test the hypothesis that melatonin can prevent delirium in critically ill patients compared with placebo.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This feasibility trial is a randomised, 3-arm, placebo-controlled study of melatonin (2 vs 0.5 mg vs placebo, administered for a maximum of 14 days) for the prevention of delirium in critically ill patients. A total of 69 patients aged 18 years and older with an expected ICU length of stay >48 hours will be recruited from 3 Canadian ICUs. The primary outcome is protocol adherence (ie, overall proportion of study drug doses administered in the prescribed administration window). Secondary outcomes include pharmacokinetic parameters, incidence, time to onset, duration of delirium, number of delirium-free days, adverse events, self-reported sleep quality, rest-activity cycles measured by wrist actigraphy, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay and mortality. Data will be analysed using an intention-to-treat approach.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by Health Canada and the research ethics board of each study site. Trial results will be presented at international conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02615340: Pre-results.

Quality of clinical practice guidelines in delirium: a systematic appraisal

OBJECTIVE

To determine the accessibility and currency of delirium guidelines, guideline summary papers and evaluation studies, and critically appraise guideline quality.

DESIGN

Systematic literature search for formal guidelines (in English or French) with focus on delirium assessment and/or management in adults (≥18 years), guideline summary papers and evaluation studies.Full appraisal of delirium guidelines published between 2008 and 2013 and obtaining a 'Rigour of Development' domain screening score cut-off of >40% using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument.

DATA SOURCES

Multiple bibliographic databases, guideline organisation databases, complemented by a grey literature search.

RESULTS

3327 database citations and 83 grey literature links were identified. A total of 118 retrieved delirium guidelines and related documents underwent full-text screening. A final 21 delirium guidelines (with 10 being >5 years old), 12 guideline summary papers and 3 evaluation studies were included. For 11 delirium guidelines published between 2008 and 2013, the screening AGREE II 'Rigour' scores ranged from 3% to 91%, with seven meeting the cut-off score of >40%. Overall, the highest rating AGREE II domains were 'Scope and Purpose' (mean 80.1%, range 64-100%) and 'Clarity and Presentation' (mean 76.7%, range 38-97%). The lowest rating domains were 'Applicability' (mean 48.7%, range 8-81%) and 'Editorial Independence' (mean 53%, range 2-90%). The three highest rating guidelines in the 'Applicability' domain incorporated monitoring criteria or audit and costing templates, and/or implementation strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Delirium guidelines are best sourced by a systematic grey literature search. Delirium guideline quality varied across all six AGREE II domains, demonstrating the importance of using a formal appraisal tool prior to guideline adaptation and implementation into clinical settings. Adding more knowledge translation resources to guidelines may improve their practical application and effective monitoring. More delirium guideline evaluation studies are needed to determine their effect on clinical practice.