Pharmacologic Management of Intensive Care Unit Delirium: Clinical Prescribing Practices and Outcomes in More Than 8500 Patient Encounters

The development of a family-led novel intervention for delirium prevention and management in the adult intensive care unit: A co-design qualitative study

AIM

The aim of this study was to codesign a Family Members' Voice Reorientation Intervention (FAMVR) for delirium prevention and management in critically ill adult patients through collaborative process with previous patients, families, and clinical staff.

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a common consequence of intensive care admission, and there is limited evidence to support family-led interventions to prevent or minimise delirium in intensive care. People with lived experience of intensive care are seldom involved in codesigning delirium prevention and management interventions despite the identified benefits of their involvement in delirium care.

DESIGN

Codesign qualitative study.

METHODS

The process of co-designing was undertaken using the four stages of the Double Diamond model. Participants included people with lived experience of the intensive care unit, family members, and intensive care clinicians. The codesign approach was utilised, and data were gathered from a series of focus groups and individual interviews. Data were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

Of the 26 people who indicated their interest in participating, 12 (46%) completed the first and second stages, and nine (35%) completed the third and fourth stages of the Family Members' Voice Reorientation Intervention development. All participant groups were represented in the fourth stage: patients (n = 4), family members (n = 1), nurses (n = 2), and medical staff (n = 2). Four themes were identified: message content, wording, reactions, and tone, all of which informed the prototype of the intervention and its associated domains.

CONCLUSION

A codesign approach was important for developing a delirium management intervention. This process enabled participants to provide their feedback in the context of their unique experiences, which in turn enhanced the authenticity and appropriateness of this unique intervention.

Valproic Acid for Hyperactive Delirium and Agitation in Critically Ill Patients

BACKGROUND

Delirium and agitation are common syndromes in critically ill patients. Valproic acid (VPA) has shown benefit in intensive care unit (ICU)-associated delirium and agitation, but further evaluation is needed.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of VPA for hyperactive delirium and agitation in critically ill adult patients.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study at NYU Langone Health was conducted in critically ill patients treated with VPA for hyperactive delirium or agitation from October 1, 2017 to October 1, 2022. The primary outcome was effectiveness of VPA, defined as a reduction in the total number of any concomitant psychoactive medication by day 3 of VPA treatment. Secondary outcomes included the effect of VPA on the doses of concomitant medications and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients were included in the final analysis. By day 3 of VPA treatment, a 33% reduction (P < .001) in the total number of concomitant psychoactive medications was observed. VPA decreased the need for sedatives, as assessed by midazolam equivalents, but no significant changes were seen with dexmedetomidine alone, opioids, or antipsychotics. A 10 mg/kg loading dose was utilized in 36% of the cohort and its use decreased the risk for initiating additional psychoactive medications by day 3 of therapy (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.0-7.8, P = .047), with benefits noted as early as 48 h after initiation. Adverse events were low in the total cohort (10.3%).

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

The addition of VPA to a complex pharmacologic regimen for hyperactive delirium and agitation is safe and can assist in the prevention of polypharmacy and overall workload in critically ill patients admitted primarily for cardiogenic shock and respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation.

Pharmacologic Treatment Strategies for Delirium in Hospitalized Adults: Past, Present, and Future

Despite the use of multidomain prevention strategies, delirium still frequently occurs in hospitalized adults. With delirium often associated with undesirable symptoms and deleterious outcomes, including cognitive decline, treatment is important. Risk-factor reduction and the protocolized use of multidomain, nonpharmacologic bundles remain the mainstay of delirium treatment. There is a current lack of strong evidence to suggest any pharmacologic intervention to treat delirium will help resolve it faster, reduce its symptoms (other than agitation), facilitate hospital throughput, or improve post-hospital outcomes including long-term cognitive function. With the exception of dexmedetomidine as a treatment of severe delirium-associated agitation in the ICU, current practice guidelines do not recommend the routine use of any pharmacologic intervention to treat delirium in any hospital population. Future research should focus on identifying and evaluating new pharmacologic delirium treatment interventions and addressing key challenges and gaps surrounding delirium treatment research.

Efficacy and safety of guanfacine in hospitalized patients with delirium: A scoping review

Objective

To assess current evidence regarding guanfacine use in hospitalized patients with delirium.

Introduction

Delirium is a common and important complication of critical illness. Central alpha-2 agonists are often used for symptomatic management. Guanfacine is an enteral central alpha-2 agonist approved for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorders. However, its use for delirium treatment has not been systematically assessed.

Inclusion criteria

All studies of guanfacine to treat patients with delirium during hospitalization. We excluded reviews, letters, commentaries, correspondence, conference abstracts, expert opinions or editorials.

Methods

We performed a systematic search of the literature using: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CENTRAL and SCOPUS (Elsevier) from inception until 29 February, 2024. Two independent reviewers assessed the identified citations and abstracts. Data on study and patient characteristics, as well as efficacy and safety outcomes, were extracted. Efficacy was defined by guanfacine's ability to relieve delirium and improve clinical outcomes, including intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and mortality. Safety was assessed for hemodynamic stability or other reported side effects.

Results

We screened 908 articles and included two case reports, one case series, two retrospective descriptive cohorts, and one retrospective analytic cohort. Guanfacine therapy was associated with delirium attenuation and a reduction in the use of sedative agents. Median dosage was 1.5 mg daily, with a median time to delirium improvement of 3 days. However, guanfacine therapy was not associated with decreased ICU or hospital LOS. The most frequently reported adverse events were mild hypotension and bradycardia.

Conclusion

There is limited data on the efficacy of guanfacine for the treatment of delirium. However, given its pharmacologic properties and its available safety data, controlled investigations may be justified.

Olanzapine Versus Quetiapine: Corrected QT Changes in Critically Ill Patients

BACKGROUND

Olanzapine and quetiapine are frequently administered atypical antipsychotic medications and their effects on the corrected QT (QTc) in the critically ill population remain understudied.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the impact of olanzapine and quetiapine on QTc changes in critically ill patients.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective analysis. Adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) from January 2023 through July 2023 were included if they received ≥2 doses of either olanzapine or quetiapine within a 48-hour period and had one QTc evaluated within 48 hours of antipsychotic initiation. The major endpoint was a composite of the incidence of QTc prolongation (defined as QTc > 500 ms or QTc > 60 ms above baseline) following antipsychotic initiation. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify risk factors for QTc prolongation.

RESULTS

There was no statistical difference in the major composite endpoint between patients in the olanzapine and quetiapine groups (8/83 [9.6%] vs 19/129 [14.7%]; P = .28). The incidence of QTc > 500 ms (7/244 [2.9%] vs 20/427 [4.7%]; P = .25) and change from baseline >60 ms (5/244 [2.0%] vs 17/427 [4.0%]; P = .26) were not statistically different between the olanzapine and quetiapine groups, respectively. There were no occurrences of Torsades de Pointes or extrapyramidal symptoms in either group.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

The results of this study suggest olanzapine and quetiapine may have similar impact on QTc prolongation in critically ill patients. These findings could contribute to safer prescribing practices in the ICU.

New initiation of opioids, benzodiazepines and antipsychotics following hospitalization for COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Patients newly initiated on opioids (OP), benzodiazepines (BZD), and antipsychotics (AP) during hospitalization are often prescribed these on discharge. Implications of this practice on outcomes remains unexplored.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the prevalence and risk factors of new initiation of select OP, BZD and AP among patients requiring in-patient stays. Test the hypothesis that new prescriptions are associated with higher odds of readmission or death within 28 days of discharge.

DESIGN

Single center retrospective cohort study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients admitted to a tertiary-level medical center with either a primary diagnosis of RT-PCR positive for COVID-19 or high index of clinical suspicion thereof.

INTERVENTION

None.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES

Exposure was the new initiation of select common OP, BZD, and AP which were continued on hospital discharge. Outcome was a composite of 28-day readmission or death following index admission. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess patient mortality or readmission within 28 days of discharge associated with new prescriptions at discharge.

RESULTS

1319 patients were included in the analysis. 11.3% (149/1319) were discharged with a new prescription of select OP, BZD, or AP either alone or in combination. OP (110/149) were most prescribed followed by BZD (41/149) and AP (22/149). After adjusting for unbalanced confounders, new prescriptions (adjusted odds ratio: 2.44, 95% confidence interval: 1.42-4.12; p = .001) were associated with readmission or death within 28 days of discharge. One in nine patients admitted with a diagnosis of COVID-19 or high clinical suspicion thereof were discharged with a new prescription of either OP, BZD or AP. New prescriptions were associated with higher odds of 28-day readmission or death. Strengthening medication reconciliation processes focused on these classes may reduce avoidable harm.

Long-term outcomes after treatment of delirium during critical illness with antipsychotics (MIND-USA): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Delirium is common during critical illness and is associated with long-term cognitive impairment and disability. Antipsychotics are frequently used to treat delirium, but their effects on long-term outcomes are unknown. We aimed to investigate the effects of antipsychotic treatment of delirious, critically ill patients on long-term cognitive, functional, psychological, and quality-of-life outcomes.

METHODS

This prespecified, long-term follow-up to the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 MIND-USA Study was conducted in 16 hospitals throughout the USA. Adults (aged ≥18 years) who had been admitted to an intensive care unit with respiratory failure or septic or cardiogenic shock were eligible for inclusion in the study if they had delirium. Participants were randomly assigned-using a computer-generated, permuted-block randomisation scheme with stratification by trial site and age-in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive intravenous placebo, haloperidol, or ziprasidone for up to 14 days. Investigators and participants were masked to treatment group assignment. 3 months and 12 months after randomisation, we assessed survivors' cognitive, functional, psychological, quality-of-life, and employment outcomes using validated telephone-administered tests and questionnaires. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01211522, and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 7, 2011, and Aug 12, 2017, we screened 20 914 individuals, of whom 566 were eligible and consented or had consent provided to participate. Of these 566 patients, 184 were assigned to the placebo group, 192 to the haloperidol group, and 190 to the ziprasidone group. 1-year survival and follow-up rates were similar between groups. Cognitive impairment was common in all three treatment groups, with a third of survivors impaired at both 3-month and 12-month follow-up in all groups. More than half of the surveyed survivors in each group had cognitive or physical limitations (or both) that precluded employment at both 3-month and 12-month follow-up. At both 3 months and 12 months, neither haloperidol (adjusted odds ratio 1·22 [95% CI 0·73-2.04] at 3 months and 1·12 [0·60-2·11] at 12 months) nor ziprasidone (1·07 [0·59-1·96] at 3 months and 0·94 [0·62-1·44] at 12 months) significantly altered cognitive outcomes, as measured by the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status T score, compared with placebo. We also found no evidence that functional, psychological, quality-of-life, or employment outcomes improved with haloperidol or ziprasidone compared with placebo.

INTERPRETATION

In delirious, critically ill patients, neither haloperidol nor ziprasidone had a significant effect on cognitive, functional, psychological, or quality-of-life outcomes among survivors. Our findings, along with insufficient evidence of short-term benefit and frequent inappropriate continuation of antipsychotics at hospital discharge, indicate that antipsychotics should not be used routinely to treat delirium in critically ill adults.

FUNDING

National Institutes of Health and the US Department of Veterans Affairs.

Exploring Antipsychotic Use for Delirium Management in Adults in Hospital, Sub-Acute Rehabilitation and Aged Care Settings: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

International guidelines discourage antipsychotic use for delirium; however, concerns persist about their continued use in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to describe the prevalence and patterns of antipsychotic use in delirium management with regard to best-practice recommendations. Primary outcomes investigated were prevalence of use, antipsychotic type, dosage and clinical indication.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria: studies of any design that examined antipsychotic use to manage delirium in adults in critical care, acute care, palliative care, rehabilitation, and aged care were included. Studies of patients in acute psychiatric care, with psychiatric illness or pre-existing antipsychotic use were excluded.

INFORMATION SOURCES

we searched five health databases on 16 August, 2023 (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, APA PsycInfo, ProQuest Health and Medical Collection) using MeSH terms and relevant keywords, including 'delirium' and 'antipsychotic'. Risk of bias: as no included studies were randomised controlled trials, all studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS

descriptive data were extracted in Covidence and synthesised in Microsoft Excel.

RESULTS

Included studies: 39 studies published between March 2004 and August 2023 from 13 countries (n = 1,359,519 patients). Most study designs were retrospective medical record audits (n = 16).

SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS

in 18 studies, participants' mean age was ≥65 years (77.79, ±5.20). Palliative care had the highest average proportion of patients with delirium managed with antipsychotics (70.87%, ±33.81%); it was lower and varied little between intensive care unit (53.53%, ±19.73%) and non-intensive care unit settings [medical, surgical and any acute care wards] (56.93%, ±26.44%) and was lowest in in-patient rehabilitation (17.8%). Seventeen different antipsychotics were reported on. In patients aged ≥65 years, haloperidol was the most frequently used and at higher than recommended mean daily doses (2.75 mg, ±2.21 mg). Other antipsychotics commonly administered were olanzapine (mean 11 mg, ±8.54 mg), quetiapine (mean 64.23 mg, ±43.20 mg) and risperidone (mean 0.97 mg, ±0.64 mg).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of antipsychotics to manage delirium is strongly discouraged in international guidelines. Antipsychotic use in delirium care is a risk for adverse health outcomes and a longer duration of delirium, especially in older people. However, this study has provided evidence that clinicians continue to use antipsychotics for delirium management, the dose, frequency and duration of which are often outside evidence-based guideline recommendations. Clinicians continue to choose antipsychotics to manage delirium symptoms to settle agitation and maintain patient and staff safety, particularly in situations where workload pressures are high. Sustained efforts are needed at the individual, team and organisational levels to educate, train and support clinicians to prioritise non-pharmacological interventions early before deciding to use antipsychotics. This could prevent delirium and avert escalation in behavioural symptoms that often lead to antipsychotic use.

The Association of Nonmodifiable Patient Factors on Antipsychotic Medication use in the Intensive Care Unit

PURPOSE

We investigated the association of age, sex, race, and insurance status on antipsychotic medication use among intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective study of adults admitted to ICUs at a tertiary academic center. Patient characteristics, hospital course, and medication (olanzapine, quetiapine, and haloperidol) data were collected. Logistic regression models evaluated the independent association of age, sex, race, and insurance status on the use of each antipsychotic, adjusting for prespecified covariates.

RESULTS

Of 27,137 encounters identified, 6191 (22.8%) received antipsychotics. Age was significantly associated with the odds of receiving olanzapine (P < .001), quetiapine (P = .001), and haloperidol (P = .0046). Male sex and public insurance status were associated with increased odds of receiving antipsychotics olanzapine, quetiapine, and haloperidol (Male vs Female: OR 1.13, 95% CI [1.04, 1.24], P = .0005; OR 1.22, 95% CI [1.10, 1.34], P = .0001; OR 1.28, 95% CI [1.17, 1.40], P < .0001, respectively; public insurance vs private insurance: OR 1.32, 95% CI [1.20, 1.46], P < .0001; OR 1.21, 95% CI [1.09, 1.34], P = .0004; OR 1.15, 95% CI [1.04, 1.27], P = .0058, respectively). Black race was also associated with a decreased odds of receiving all antipsychotics (olanzapine (P = .0177), quetiapine (P = .004), haloperidol (P = .0041)).

CONCLUSIONS

Age, sex, race, and insurance status were associated with the use of all antipsychotic medications investigated, highlighting the importance of investigating the potential impact of these prescribing decisions on patient outcomes across diverse populations. Recognizing how nonmodifiable patient factors have the potential to influence prescribing practices may be considered an important factor toward optimizing medication regimens.

Recurrent delirium episodes within the intensive care unit: Incidence and associated factors

PURPOSE

Describe the incidence and factors associated with recurrent delirium in the intensive care unit (ICU).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective study of ICU patients diagnosed with delirium. Delirium clearance defined as 48 h of negative delirium assessments following initial episode and recurrent delirium as any positive delirium assessment following clearance. Multivariable logistic regression model assessed independent association of patient and hospital factors on development of recurrent delirium, adjusting for pre-defined covariates.

RESULTS

Among 8591 ICU admissions identified with delirium, 1067 (12.4%) had recurrent symptoms. Factors associated with increased odds of recurrent delirium were age (nonlinear; p = 0.02), shock (OR 1.45, 95% CI [1.20, 1.75]), admission to medical (OR 3.25, 95% CI [2.42, 4.37]), surgical (OR 3.00, 95% CI [2.21, 4.06]), or trauma (OR 2.17, 95% CI [1.58, 3.00]) ICU vs. cardiovascular ICU, increased duration of mechanical ventilation (OR 2.43, 95% CI [2.22, 2.65]), propofol use (OR 1.35, 95% CI [1.02, 1.80]), and antipsychotic medications (haloperidol OR 1.53, 95% CI [1.26, 1.86]; quetiapine OR 2.45, 95% CI [1.98, 3.02]; and olanzapine OR 1.54, 95% CI [1.25, 1.88]).

CONCLUSIONS

Over 10% of delirious ICU patients had recurrent symptoms. Factors associated with recurrence included age, duration of mechanical ventilation and medication exposure.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

Not applicable.

Clinical Features of Delirium among Patients in the Intensive Care Unit According to Motor Subtype Classification: A Retrospective Longitudinal Study

PURPOSE

Delirium in the intensive care unit (ICU) poses a significant safety and socioeconomic burden to patients and caregivers. However, invasive interventions for managing delirium have severe drawbacks. To reduce unnecessary interventions during ICU hospitalization, we aimed to investigate the features of delirium among ICU patients according to the occurrence of hypoactive symptoms, which are not expected to require invasive intervention.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Psychiatrists assessed all patients with delirium in the ICU during hospitalization. Patients were grouped into two groups: a "non-hypoactive" group that experienced the non-hypoactive motor subtype once or more or a "hypoactive only" group that only experienced the hypoactive motor subtype. Clinical variables routinely gathered for clinical management were collected from electronic medical records. Group comparisons and logistic regression analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

The non-hypoactive group had longer and more severe delirium episodes than the hypoactive only group. Although the non-hypoactive group was prescribed more antipsychotics and required restraints longer, the hypoactive only group also received both interventions. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, BUN [odds ratio (OR): 0.993, pH OR: 0.202], sodium (OR: 1.022), RASS score (OR: 1.308) and whether restraints were applied [OR: 1.579 (95% confidence interval 1.194-2.089), p<0.001] were significant predictors of hypoactive only group classification.

CONCLUSION

Managing and predicting delirium patients based on whether patients experienced non-hypoactive delirium may be clinically important. Variables obtained during the initial 48 hours can be used to determine which patients are likely to require invasive interventions.

Impacts of antipsychotic medication prescribing practices in critically ill adult patients on health resource utilization and new psychoactive medication prescriptions

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic medications are commonly prescribed to critically ill adult patients and initiation of new antipsychotic prescriptions in the intensive care unit (ICU) increases the proportion of patients discharged home on antipsychotics. Critically ill adult patients are also frequently exposed to multiple psychoactive medications during ICU admission and hospitalization including benzodiazepines and opioid medications which may increase the risk of psychoactive polypharmacy following hospital discharge. The associated impact on health resource utilization and risk of new benzodiazepine and opioid prescriptions is unknown.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the burden of health resource utilization and odds of new prescriptions of benzodiazepines and opioids up to 1-year post-hospital discharge in critically ill patients with new antipsychotic prescriptions at hospital discharge?

STUDY DESIGN & METHODS

We completed a multi-center, propensity-score matched retrospective cohort study of critically ill adult patients. The primary exposure was administration of ≥1 dose of an antipsychotic while the patient was admitted in the ICU and ward with continuation at hospital discharge and a filled outpatient prescription within 1-year following hospital discharge. The control group was defined as no doses of antipsychotics administered in the ICU and hospital ward and no filled outpatient prescriptions for antipsychotics within 1-year following hospital discharge. The primary outcome was health resource utilization (72-hour ICU readmission, 30-day hospital readmission, 30-day emergency room visitation, 30-day mortality). Secondary outcomes were administration of benzodiazepines and/or opioids in-hospital and following hospital discharge in patients receiving antipsychotics.

RESULTS

1,388 propensity-score matched patients were included who did and did not receive antipsychotics in ICU and survived to hospital discharge. New antipsychotic prescriptions were not associated with increased health resource utilization or 30-day mortality following hospital discharge. There was increased odds of new prescriptions of benzodiazepines (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.61 [95%CI 1.19-2.19]) and opioids (aOR 1.82 [95%CI 1.38-2.40]) up to 1-year following hospital discharge in patients continuing antipsychotics at hospital discharge.

INTERPRETATION

New antipsychotic prescriptions at hospital discharge are significantly associated with additional prescriptions of benzodiazepines and opioids in-hospital and up to 1-year following hospital discharge.

Veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Anesthetic Considerations in Clinical Practice

CONTEXT

After the COVID-19 pandemic, multiple reviews have documented the success of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). Patients who experience hypoxemia but have normal contractility may be switched to veno-venous-ECMO (VV-ECMO).

PURPOSE

In this review, we present three protocols for anesthesiologists. Firstly, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) aids in cannulation and weaning off inotropes and fluids. Our main objective is to assist in patient selection for the Avalon Elite single catheter, which is inserted into the right internal jugular vein and terminates in the right atrium. Secondly, we propose appropriate anticoagulant doses. We outline day-to-day monitoring protocols to prevent heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) or resistance. Once the effects of neuromuscular paralysis subside, sedation should be reduced. Therefore, we describe techniques that may prevent delirium from progressing into permanent cognitive decline.

METHODS

We conducted a PubMed search using the keywords VV-ECMO, TEE, Avalon Elite (Maquet, Germany), and quetiapine. We combined these findings with interviews conducted with nurses and anesthesiologists from two academic ECMO centers, focusing on anticoagulation and sedation.

RESULTS

Our qualitative evidence synthesis reveals how TEE confirms cannulation while avoiding right atrial rupture or low flows. Additionally, we discovered that typically, after initial heparinization, activated partial thromboplastin time (PTT) is drawn every 1 to 2 hours or every 6 to 8 hours once stable. Daily thromboelastograms, along with platelet counts and antithrombin III levels, may detect HIT or resistance, respectively. These side effects can be prevented by discontinuing heparin on day two and initiating argatroban at a dose of 1 μg/kg/min while maintaining PTT between 61 - 80 seconds. The argatroban dose is adjusted by 10 - 20% if PTT is between 40 - 60 or 80 - 90 seconds. Perfusionists assist in establishing protocols following manufacturer guidelines. Lastly, we describe the replacement of narcotics and benzodiazepines with dexmedetomidine at a dose of 0.5 to 1 μg/kg/hour, limited by bradycardia, and the use of quetiapine starting at 25 mg per day and gradually increasing up to 200 mg twice a day, limited by prolonged QT interval.

CONCLUSIONS

The limitation of this review is that it necessarily covers a broad range of ECMO decisions faced by an anesthesiologist. However, its main advantage lies in the identification of straightforward argatroban protocols through interviews, as well as the discovery, via PubMed, of the usefulness of TEE in determining cannula position and contractility estimates for transitioning from VA-ECMO to VV-ECMO. Additionally, we emphasize the benefits in terms of morbidity and mortality of a seldom-discussed sedation supplement, quetiapine, to dexmedetomidine.

Delirium in trauma ICUs: a review of incidence, risk factors, outcomes, and management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the impact and importance of delirium on patients admitted to the ICU after trauma, including the latest work on prevention and treatment of this condition. As the population ages, the incidence of geriatric trauma will continue to increase with a concomitant rise in the patient and healthcare costs of delirium in this population.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have further defined the risk factors for delirium in the trauma ICU patient population, as well as better demonstrated the poor outcomes associated with the diagnosis of delirium in these patients. Recent trials and meta-analysis offer some new evidence for the use of dexmedetomidine and quetiapine as preferred agents for prevention and treatment of delirium and add music interventions as a promising part of nonpharmacologic bundles.

SUMMARY

Trauma patients requiring admission to the ICU are at significant risk of developing delirium, an acute neuropsychiatric disorder associated with increased healthcare costs and worse outcomes including increased mortality. Ideal methods for prevention and treatment of delirium are not well established, especially in this population, but recent research helps to clarify optimal prevention and treatment strategies.

Standardized pharmacological management of delirium after on-pump cardiac surgery reduces ICU stay and ventilation in a retrospective pre-post study

Cardiac surgery patients not only undergo a highly invasive procedure but are at risk for a diversity of postoperative complications. Up to 53% of these patients suffer from postoperative delirium (POD). This severe and common adverse event increases mortality and prolonged mechanical ventilation and extends the intensive care unit stay. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that standardized pharmacological management of delirium (SPMD) may reduce the length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU), duration of postoperative mechanical ventilation, and the incidence of postoperative complications such as pneumonia or bloodstream infections in on-pump cardiac surgery ICU patients. In this retrospective, single-center observational cohort study, 247 patients were examined between May 2018 to June 2020, who underwent on-pump cardiac surgery, suffered from POD, and received pharmacological POD treatment. 125 were treated before and 122 after SPMD implementation in the ICU. The primary endpoint was a composite outcome, including the length of ICU stay, postoperative mechanical ventilation time, and ICU survival rate. The secondary endpoints were complications including postoperative pneumonia and bloodstream infections. Although the ICU survival rate was not significantly different between both groups, the length of ICU stay (control group: 23 ± 27 days; SPMD group: 16 ± 16 days; p = 0.024) and the duration of mechanical ventilation were significantly reduced in the SPMD-cohort (control group: 230 ± 395 h; SPMD group: 128 ± 268 h; p = 0.022). Concordantly, the pneumonic risk was reduced after SPMD introduction (control group: 44.0%; SPMD group: 27.9%; p = 0.012) as well as the incidence for bloodstream infections (control group: 19.2%; SPMD group: 6.6%; p = 0.004). Standardized pharmacological management of postoperative delirium in on-pump cardiac surgery ICU patients reduced the length of ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation significantly, leading to a decrease in pneumonic complications and bloodstream infections.

Olanzapine for the treatment of ICU delirium: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

As an atypical antipsychotic drug, olanzapine is one of the most commonly used drugs for delirium control. There are no systematic evaluations or meta-analyses of the efficacy and safety of olanzapine for delirium control in critically ill adults.

Objectives

In this meta-analysis, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of olanzapine for delirium control in critically ill adults in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Data Sources and Methods

From inception to October 2022, 12 electronic databases were searched. We retrieved randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies of critically ill adults with delirium that compared the effects of olanzapine and other interventions, including routine care (no intervention), nonpharmaceutical interventions and pharmaceutical interventions. The main outcome measures were the (a) relief of delirium symptoms and (b) a decrease in delirium duration. Secondary outcomes were ICU and in-hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay, incidence of adverse events, cognitive function, sleep quality, quality of life, mechanical ventilation time, endotracheal intubation rate and delirium recurrence rate. We applied a random effects model.

Results

Data from 10 studies (four RCTs and six retrospective cohort studies) involving 7076 patients (2459 in the olanzapine group and 4617 in the control group) were included. Olanzapine did not effectively relieve delirium symptoms (OR = 1.36, 95% CI [0.83, 2.28], p = 0.21), nor did it shorten the duration of delirium [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.02, 95% CI [-1.04, 1.09], p = 0.97] when compared with other interventions. Pooled data from three studies showed that the use of olanzapine reduced the incidence of hypotension (OR = 0.44, 95% CI [0.20, 0.95], p = 0.04) compared with other pharmaceuticals. There was no significant difference in other secondary outcomes, including ICU or hospital length of stay, in-hospital mortality, extrapyramidal reactions, QTc interval prolongation, or overall incidence of other adverse reactions. The number of included studies was not sufficient for performing a comparison between olanzapine and no intervention.

Conclusion

Compared with other interventions, olanzapine has no advantage in alleviating delirium symptoms and shortening delirium duration in critically ill adults. However, there is some evidence that the rate of hypotension was lower in patients who received olanzapine than in those who received other pharmaceutical interventions. There was a nonsignificant difference in the length of ICU or hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, and other adverse reactions. This study provides reference data for delirium research and clinical drug intervention strategies in critically ill adults.

Registration

Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration number CRD42021277232).

Postoperative delirium in geriatric patients with hip fractures

Postoperative delirium (POD) is a frequent complication in geriatric patients with hip fractures, which is linked to poorer functional recovery, longer hospital stays, and higher short-and long-term mortality. Patients with increased age, preoperative cognitive impairment, comorbidities, perioperative polypharmacy, and delayed surgery are more prone to develop POD after hip fracture surgery. In this narrative review, we outlined the latest findings on postoperative delirium in geriatric patients with hip fractures, focusing on its pathophysiology, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment. Perioperative risk prediction, avoidance of certain medications, and orthogeriatric comprehensive care are all examples of effective interventions. Choices of anesthesia technique may not be associated with a significant difference in the incidence of postoperative delirium in geriatric patients with hip fractures. There are few pharmaceutical measures available for POD treatment. Dexmedetomidine and multimodal analgesia may be effective for managing postoperative delirium, and adverse complications should be considered when using antipsychotics. In conclusion, perioperative risk intervention based on orthogeriatric comprehensive care is the most effective strategy for preventing postoperative delirium in geriatric patients with hip fractures.

A National Modified Delphi Consensus Process to Prioritize Experiences and Interventions for Antipsychotic Medication Deprescribing Among Adult Patients With Critical Illness

Antipsychotic medications are frequently prescribed to critically ill patients leading to their continuation at transitions of care thereafter. The aim of this study was to generate evidence-informed consensus statements with key stakeholders on antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing for ICU patients.

DESIGN

We completed three rounds of surveys in a National modified Delphi consensus process. During rounds 1 and 2, participants used a 9-point Likert scale (1-strongly disagree, 9-strongly agree) to rate perceptions related to antipsychotic prescribing (i.e., experiences regarding delivery of patient care), knowledge and frequency of antipsychotic use, knowledge surrounding antipsychotic guideline recommendations, and strategies (i.e., interventions addressing current antipsychotic prescribing practices) for antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing. Consensus was defined as a median score of 1-3 or 7-9. During round 3, participants ranked statements on antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing strategies that achieved consensus (median score 7-9) using a weighted ranking scale (0-100 points) to determine priority.

SETTING

Online surveys distributed across Canada.

SUBJECTS

Fifty-seven stakeholders (physicians, nurses, pharmacists) who work with ICU patients.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Participants prioritized six consensus statements on strategies for consideration when developing and implementing interventions to guide antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing. Statements focused on limiting antipsychotic prescribing to patients: 1) with hyperactive delirium, 2) at risk to themselves, their family, and/or staff due to agitation, and 3) whose care and treatment are being impacted due to agitation or delirium, and prioritizing 4) communication among staff about antipsychotic effectiveness, 5) direct and efficient communication tools on antipsychotic deprescribing at transitions of care, and 6) medication reconciliation at transitions of care.

CONCLUSIONS

We engaged diverse stakeholders to generate evidence-informed consensus statements regarding antipsychotic prescribing perceptions and practices that can be used to implement interventions to promote antipsychotic minimization and deprescribing strategies for ICU patients with and following critical illness.

A scoping review of perceptions from healthcare professionals on antipsychotic prescribing practices in acute care settings

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic medications are frequently prescribed in acute care for clinical indications other than primary psychiatric disorders such as delirium. Unfortunately, they are commonly continued at hospital discharge and at follow-ups thereafter. The objective of this scoping review was to characterize antipsychotic medication prescribing practices, to describe healthcare professional perceptions on antipsychotic prescribing and deprescribing practices, and to report on antipsychotic deprescribing strategies within acute care.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases from inception date to July 3, 2021 for published primary research studies reporting on antipsychotic medication prescribing and deprescribing practices, and perceptions on those practices within acute care. We included all study designs excluding protocols, editorials, opinion pieces, and systematic or scoping reviews. Two reviewers screened and abstracted data independently and in duplicate. The protocol was registered on Open Science Framework prior to data abstraction (10.17605/OSF.IO/W635Z).

RESULTS

Of 4528 studies screened, we included 80 studies. Healthcare professionals across all acute care settings (intensive care, inpatient, emergency department) perceived prescribing haloperidol (n = 36/36, 100%) most frequently, while measured prescribing practices reported common quetiapine prescribing (n = 26/36, 76%). Indications for antipsychotic prescribing were delirium (n = 48/69, 70%) and agitation (n = 20/69, 29%). Quetiapine (n = 18/18, 100%) was most frequently prescribed at hospital discharge. Three studies reported in-hospital antipsychotic deprescribing strategies focused on pharmacist-driven deprescribing authority, handoff tools, and educational sessions.

CONCLUSIONS

Perceived antipsychotic prescribing practices differed from measured prescribing practices in acute care settings. Few in-hospital deprescribing strategies were described. Ongoing evaluation of antipsychotic deprescribing strategies are needed to evaluate their efficacy and risk.

100 Years of Critical Care in the Pages of Anesthesia & Analgesia

The founding of Anesthesia & Analgesia (A&A) in 1922 was roughly contemporaneous with the creation of the first intensive care unit (ICU) in the United States at Johns Hopkins in 1923. Throughout the next 100 years, the pages of A&A have mirrored the development of critical care as its own distinct specialty. Although primarily a journal focused on intraoperative anesthesia, A&A has maintained a small but steady presence in critical care research. This review highlights the history and development of critical care publications in the pages of A&A from early observations on the physiology of critical illness (1922-1949) to the groundbreaking work of Peter Safar and others on cardiopulmonary resuscitation (1950-1970), the growth of modern critical care (1970-2010), and the 2020 to 2022 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) era.