Effect of Haloperidol on Survival Among Critically Ill Adults With a High Risk of Delirium: The REDUCE Randomized Clinical Trial

Disparities in Delirium across the Continuum of Care and Associations with Social Determinants of Health

Disparities exist in the identification, treatment, and management of delirium. These disparities can be most holistically and comprehensively understood by using a social-ecological model-which acknowledges multilevel impacts including individual, interpersonal, organizational, community, and policy-level factors-as well as a social determinant of health framework, that considers nonmedical factors that influence health outcomes. This narrative review leverages both frameworks to identify and discuss existing literature pertaining to the intersection of these social risk factors and delirium, focusing specifically on disparities due to racial and/or ethnic identity, language ability, and socioeconomic differences. We also look at disparities and the potential role of these social risk factors throughout the continuum of care, including prehospitalization, hospitalization, and posthospitalization factors. Understanding and analyzing the role of these inequities is critical to ensuring better health outcomes for patients at risk of and/or with delirium.

Delirium in the ICU: how much do we know? A narrative review

Delirium in critical ill patients is a complex and common neurological syndrome in the intensive care unit (ICU) that is caused by a range of structural or functional abnormalities. ICU Delirium is associated with reduced compliance, prolonged hospital stays, greater use or delayed withdrawal of sedatives, higher rates and durations of mechanical ventilation, and higher rates of mortality. The aetiology and pathogenesis of ICU delirium are unclear, and the lack of better prediction, prevention, and treatment measures leads to a non-standardized control of delirium. By searching the relevant literature, we aim in this narrative review to describe progress in the pathogenesis, predictive biomarkers, diagnosis, and treatment of ICU delirium.

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.

Discovery of novel protective agents for infection-related delirium through bispectral electroencephalography

Delirium is a multifactorial medical condition of waxing and waning impairment across various domains of mental functioning over time. Importantly, delirium is also one of the greatest risk factors for prolonged hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality. Studying this important condition is challenging due to the difficulty in both objective diagnosis in patients and validation of laboratory models. As a result, there is a lack of protective treatments for delirium. Our recent studies report the efficacy of bispectral electroencephalography (BSEEG) in diagnosing delirium in patients and predicting patient outcomes, advancing the concept that this simple measure could represent an additional vital sign for patients. Here, we applied BSEEG to characterize and validate a novel lipopolysaccharide (LPS) mouse model of infection-related delirium. We then applied this model to evaluate the protective efficacy of three putative therapeutic agents: the conventional antipsychotic medication haloperidol, the neuroprotective compound P7C3-A20, and the antibiotic minocycline. Aged mice were more susceptible than young mice to LPS-induced aberration in BSEEG, reminiscent of the greater vulnerability of older adults to delirium. In both young and old mice, P7C3-A20 and minocycline administration prevented LPS-induced BSEEG abnormality. By contrast, haloperidol did not. P7C3-A20 and minocycline have been shown to limit different aspects of LPS toxicity, and our data offers proof of principle that these agents might help protect patients from developing infection-related delirium. Thus, utilization of BSEEG in a mouse model for infection-related delirium can identify putative therapeutic agents for applications in patient clinical trials.

Common molecular and pathophysiological underpinnings of delirium and Alzheimer's disease: molecular signatures and therapeutic indications

BACKGROUND

Delirium and Alzheimer's disease (AD) are common causes of cognitive dysfunction among older adults. These neurodegenerative diseases share a common and complex relationship, and can occur individually or concurrently, increasing the chance of permanent mental dysfunction. However, the common molecular pathophysiology, key proteomic biomarkers, and functional pathways are largely unknown, whereby delirium is superimposed on AD and dementia.

METHODS

We employed an integrated bioinformatics and system biology analysis approach to decipher such common key proteomic signatures, pathophysiological links between delirium and AD by analyzing the gene expression data of AD-affected human brain samples and comparing them with delirium-associated proteins. The present study identified the common drug target hub-proteins examining the protein-protein interaction (PPI) and gene regulatory network analysis. The functional enrichment and pathway analysis was conducted to reveal the common pathophysiological relationship. Finally, the molecular docking and dynamic simulation was used to computationally identify and validate the potential drug target and repurposable drugs for delirium and AD.

RESULTS

We detected 99 shared differentially expressed genes (sDEGs) associated with AD and delirium. The sDEGs-set enrichment analysis detected the transmission across chemical synapses, neurodegeneration pathways, neuroinflammation and glutamatergic signaling pathway, oxidative stress, and BDNF signaling pathway as the most significant signaling pathways shared by delirium and AD. The disease-sDEGs interaction analysis highlighted the other disease risk factors with delirium and AD development and progression. Among the sDEGs of delirium and AD, the top 10 hub-proteins including ALB, APP, BDNF, CREB1, DLG4, GAD1, GAD2, GFAP, GRIN2B and GRIN2A were found by the PPI network analysis. Based on the maximum molecular docking binding affinities and molecular dynamic simulation (100 ns) results, the ALB and GAD2 were found as prominent drug target proteins when tacrine and donepezil were identified as potential drug candidates for delirium and AD.

CONCLUSION

The study outlined the common key biomolecules and biological pathways shared by delirium and AD. The computationally reported potential drug molecules need a deeper investigation including clinical trials to validate their effectiveness. The outcomes from this study will help to understand the typical pathophysiological relationship between delirium and AD and flag future therapeutic development research for delirium.

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological prevention and management of delirium in critically ill and palliative patients in the inpatient setting: a review

Introduction

This review explores delirium in critically ill patients in the inpatient setting, focusing on its prevention and management. It evaluates the efficacy of both current pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions, aiming to provide a comprehensive overview.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted to identify relevant studies investigating the prevention and management of delirium resulting in a final sample of 26 articles for analysis.

Results

Of the 26 articles analyzed for this review (N = 8,831 participants) of controlled trials, 16 studies examined the prevention of delirium, 9 explored the treatment of delirium, and 1 investigated both prevention and treatment of delirium.

Discussion

Among the reviewed studies, there is evidence that non-pharmacologic methods are effective in the prevention of delirium. Evidence regarding pharmacological interventions for delirium prevention is varied and inconclusive, with some indication that atypical antipsychotics like aripiprazole and quetiapine may reduce the incidence of delirium. Regarding the treatment of delirium, there is limited evidence supporting the use of pharmacological agents. Additional double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials are needed to investigate the efficacy of pharmacologic agents for diverse hospitalized populations.

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.

Nursing Intervention to Prevent and Manage Delirium in Critically Ill Patients: A Scoping Review

Delirium is an acute neuropsychiatric syndrome of multifactorial etiology with a high incidence in people admitted to intensive care units. In addition to reversible impairment of cognitive processes, it may be associated with changes in thinking and perception. If, in the past, it was considered an expected complication of severe disease, nowadays, delirium is associated with a poor short-term and long-term prognosis. Knowing that its prevention and early identification can reduce morbidity, mortality, and health costs, it is vital to investigate nursing interventions focused on delirium in critically ill patients. This study aimed to identify nursing interventions in the prevention and management of delirium in critically ill adults. The method used to answer the research question was a scoping review. The literature search was performed in the Medline (via PubMed), CINAHL (via EBSCOhost), Scopus, Web of Science, and JBI databases. The final sample included 15 articles. Several categories of non-pharmacological interventions were identified, addressing the modifiable risk factors that contribute to the development of delirium, and for which nurses have a privileged position in their minimization. No drug agent can, by itself, prevent or treat delirium. However, psychoactive drugs are justified to control hyperactive behaviors through cautious use. Early diagnosis, prevention, or treatment can reduce symptoms and improve the individual's quality of life. Therefore, nursing professionals must ensure harmonious coordination between non-pharmacological and pharmacological strategies.

A joint frailty model for recurrent and competing terminal events: Application to delirium in the ICU

Joint models linking longitudinal biomarkers or recurrent event processes with a terminal event, for example, mortality, have been studied extensively. Motivated by studies of recurrent delirium events in patients receiving care in an intensive care unit (ICU), we devise a joint model for a recurrent event process and multiple terminal events. Being discharged alive from the ICU or experiencing mortality may be associated with a patient's hazard of delirium, violating the assumption of independent censoring. Moreover, the direction of the association between the hazards of delirium and mortality may be opposite of the direction of association between the hazards of delirium and ICU discharge. Hence treating either terminal event as independent censoring may bias inferences. We propose a competing joint model that uses a latent frailty to link a patient's recurrent and competing terminal event processes. We fit our model to data from a completed placebo-controlled clinical trial, which studied whether Haloperidol could prevent death and delirium among ICU patients. The clinical trial served as a foundation for a simulation study, in which we evaluate the properties, for example, bias and confidence interval coverage, of the competing joint model. As part of the simulation study, we demonstrate the shortcomings of using a joint model with a recurrent delirium process and a single terminal event to study delirium in the ICU. Lastly, we discuss limitations and possible extensions for the competing joint model. The competing joint model has been added to frailtypack, an R package for fitting an assortment of joint models.

Association between body mass index and delirium incidence in critically ill patients: a retrospective cohort study based on the MIMIC-IV Database

OBJECTIVES

Delirium is a form of brain dysfunction with high incidence and is associated with many negative outcomes in the intensive care unit. However, few studies have been large enough to reliably examine the associations between body mass index (BMI) and delirium, especially in critically ill patients. The objective of this study was to investigate the association between BMI and delirium incidence in critically ill patients.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Data were collected from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-IV V2.0 Database consisting of critically ill participants between 2008 and 2019 at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 20 193 patients with BMI and delirium records were enrolled in this study and were divided into six groups.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Delirium incidence.

RESULTS

Generalised linear models and restricted cubic spline analysis were used to estimate the associations between BMI and delirium incidence. A total of 30.81% of the patients (6222 of 20 193) developed delirium in the total cohort. Compared with those in the healthy weight group, the patients in the different groups (underweight, overweight, obesity grade 1, obesity grade 2, obesity grade 3) had different relative risks (RRs): RR=1.10, 95% CI=1.02 to 1.19, p=0.011; RR=0.93, 95% CI=0.88 to 0.97, p=0.003; RR=0.88, 95% CI=0.83 to 0.94, p<0.001; RR=0.94, 95% CI=0.86 to 1.03, p=0.193; RR=1.14, 95% CI=1.03 to 1.25, p=0.010, respectively. For patients with or without adjustment variables, there was an obvious U-shaped relationship between BMI as a continuous variable and delirium incidence.

CONCLUSION

BMI was associated with the incidence of delirium. Our results suggested that a BMI higher or lower than obesity grade 1 rather than the healthy weight in critically ill patients increases the risk of delirium incidence.

Antipsychotics and the QTc Interval During Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Antipsychotic medications, often prescribed for delirium in intensive care units (ICUs), may contribute to QTc interval prolongation.

Objective

To determine whether antipsychotics increase the QTc interval in patients with delirium in the ICU.

Design, Setting, and Participants

An a priori analysis of a randomized clinical trial in medical/surgical ICUs within 16 centers across the US was conducted. Participants included adults with delirium in the ICU with baseline QTc interval less than 550 ms. The study was conducted from December 2011 to August 2017. Data analysis was performed from April 25 to August 18, 2021.

Interventions

Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to intravenous haloperidol, ziprasidone, or saline placebo administered twice daily until resolution of delirium, ICU discharge, or 14 days.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Twelve-lead electrocardiograms were used to measure baseline QTc before study drug initiation and telemetry was used to measure QTc before each subsequent dose of study drug. Unadjusted day-to-day changes in QTc were calculated and multivariable proportional odds regression was used to estimate the effects of antipsychotics vs placebo on next-day maximum QTc interval, adjusting for prespecified baseline covariates and potential interactions with sex. Safety end points, including the occurrence of torsade de pointes, were evaluated. All analyses were conducted based on the intention to treat principle.

Results

A total of 566 patients were randomized to haloperidol (n = 192), ziprasidone (n = 190), or placebo (n = 184). Median age was 60.1 (IQR, 51.4-68.7) years; 323 were men (57%). Baseline median QTc intervals across the groups were similar: haloperidol, 458.0 (IQR, 432.0-479.0) ms; ziprasidone, 451.0 (IQR, 424.0-472.0) ms; and placebo, 452.0 (IQR, 432.0-472.0) ms. From day 1 to day 2, median QTc changed minimally: haloperidol, -1.0 (IQR, -28.0 to 15.0) ms; ziprasidone, 0 (IQR, -23.0 to 20.0) ms; and placebo, -3.5 (IQR, -24.8 to 17.0) ms. Compared with placebo, neither haloperidol (odds ratio [OR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.66-1.37; P = .78) nor ziprasidone (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.75-1.57; P = .78) was associated with next-day QTc intervals. Effects were not significantly modified by sex (P = .41 for interaction). There were 2 occurrences of nonfatal torsade de pointes, both in the haloperidol group. Neither was associated with study drug administration.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this trial suggest that daily QTc interval monitoring during antipsychotic use may have limited value in patients in the ICU with normal baseline QTc and few risk factors for QTc prolongation.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01211522.

Serum proteomic analysis in esophagectomy patients with postoperative delirium: A case-control study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative delirium occurs in up to 80% of patients undergoing esophagectomy. We performed an exploratory proteomic analysis to identify protein pathways that may be associated with delirium post-esophagectomy.

OBJECTIVES

Identify proteins associated with delirium and delirium severity in a younger and higher-risk surgical population.

METHODS

We performed a case-control study using blood samples collected from patients enrolled in a negative, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. English speaking adults aged 18 years or older, undergoing esophagectomy, who had blood samples obtained were included. Cases were defined by a positive delirium screen after surgery while controls were patients with negative delirium assessments. Delirium was assessed using Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale and Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit, and delirium severity was assessed by Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98. Blood samples were collected pre-operatively and on post-operative day 1, and discovery proteomic analysis was performed. Between-group differences in median abundance ratios were reported using Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney Odds (WMWodds1) test.

RESULTS

52 (26 cases, 26 controls) patients were included in the study with a mean age of 64 (SD 9.6) years, 1.9% were females and 25% were African American. The median duration of delirium was 1 day (IQR: 1-2), and the median delirium/coma duration was 2.5 days (IQR: 2-4). Two proteins with greater relative abundance ratio in patients with delirium were: Coagulation factor IX (WMWodds: 1.89 95%CI: 1.0-4.2) and mannosyl-oligosaccharide 1,2-alpha-mannosidase (WMWodds: 2.4 95%CI: 1.03-9.9). Protein abundance ratios associated with mean delirium severity at postoperative day 1 were Complement C2 (Spearman rs = -0.31, 95%CI [-0.55, -0.02]) and Mannosyl-oligosaccharide 1,2-alpha-mannosidase (rs = 0.61, 95%CI = [0.29, 0.81]).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified changes in proteins associated with coagulation, inflammation, and protein handling; larger, follow-up studies are needed to confirm our hypothesis-generating findings.

Long-term outcomes with haloperidol versus placebo in acutely admitted adult ICU patients with delirium

PURPOSE

We assessed long-term outcomes in acutely admitted adult patients with delirium treated in intensive care unit (ICU) with haloperidol versus placebo.

METHODS

We conducted pre-planned analyses of 1-year outcomes in the Agents Intervening against Delirium in the ICU (AID-ICU) trial, including mortality and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessed by Euroqol (EQ) 5-dimension 5-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) index values and EQ visual analogue scale (EQ VAS) (deceased patients were assigned the numeric value zero). Outcomes were analysed using logistic and linear regressions with bootstrapping and G-computation, all with adjustment for the stratification variables (site and delirium motor subtype) and multiple imputations for missing HRQoL values.

RESULTS

At 1-year follow-up, we obtained vital status for 96.2% and HRQoL data for 83.3% of the 1000 randomised patients. One-year mortality was 224/501 (44.7%) in the haloperidol group versus 251/486 (51.6%) in the placebo group, with an adjusted absolute risk difference of - 6.4%-points (95% confidence interval [CI] - 12.8%-points to - 0.2%-points; P = 0.045). These results were largely consistent across the secondary analyses. For HRQoL, the adjusted mean differences were 0.04 (95% CI - 0.03 to 0.11; P = 0.091) for EQ-5D-5L-5L index values, and 3.3 (95% CI - 9.3 to 17.5; P = 0.142) for EQ VAS.

CONCLUSIONS

In acutely admitted adult ICU patients with delirium, haloperidol treatment reduced mortality at 1-year follow-up, but did not statistically significantly improve HRQoL.

Efficacy of haloperidol to decrease the burden of delirium in adult critically ill patients: the EuRIDICE randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The role of haloperidol as treatment for ICU delirium and related symptoms remains controversial despite two recent large controlled trials evaluating its efficacy and safety. We sought to determine whether haloperidol when compared to placebo in critically ill adults with delirium reduces days with delirium and coma and improves delirium-related sequelae.

METHODS

This multi-center double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial at eight mixed medical-surgical Dutch ICUs included critically ill adults with delirium (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist ≥ 4 or a positive Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU) admitted between February 2018 and January 2020. Patients were randomized to intravenous haloperidol 2.5 mg or placebo every 8 h, titrated up to 5 mg every 8 h if delirium persisted until ICU discharge or up to 14 days. The primary outcome was ICU delirium- and coma-free days (DCFDs) within 14 days after randomization. Predefined secondary outcomes included the protocolized use of sedatives for agitation and related behaviors, patient-initiated extubation and invasive device removal, adverse drug associated events, mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, 28-day mortality, and long-term outcomes up to 1-year after randomization.

RESULTS

The trial was terminated prematurely for primary endpoint futility on DSMB advice after enrolment of 132 (65 haloperidol; 67 placebo) patients [mean age 64 (15) years, APACHE IV score 73.1 (33.9), male 68%]. Haloperidol did not increase DCFDs (adjusted RR 0.98 [95% CI 0.73-1.31], p = 0.87). Patients treated with haloperidol (vs. placebo) were less likely to receive benzodiazepines (adjusted OR 0.41 [95% CI 0.18-0.89], p = 0.02). Effect measures of other secondary outcomes related to agitation (use of open label haloperidol [OR 0.43 (95% CI 0.12-1.56)] and other antipsychotics [OR 0.63 (95% CI 0.29-1.32)], self-extubation or invasive device removal [OR 0.70 (95% CI 0.22-2.18)]) appeared consistently more favorable with haloperidol, but the confidence interval also included harm. Adverse drug events were not different. Long-term secondary outcomes (e.g., ICU recall and quality of life) warrant further study.

CONCLUSIONS

Haloperidol does not reduce delirium in critically ill delirious adults. However, it may reduce rescue medication requirements and agitation-related events in delirious ICU patients warranting further evaluation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (#NCT03628391), October 9, 2017.

Preventing and treating delirium in clinical settings for older adults

Delirium is a serious consequence of many acute or worsening chronic medical conditions, a side effect of medications, and a precipitant of worsening functional and cognitive status in older adults. It is a syndrome characterized by fluctuations in cognition and impaired attention that develops over a short period of time in response to an underlying medical condition, a substance (prescribed, over the counter, or recreational), or substance withdrawal and can be multi-factorial. We present a narrative review of the literature on nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic approaches to prevention and treatment of delirium with a focus on older adults as a vulnerable population. Older adult patients are most at risk due to decreasing physiologic reserves, with delirium rates of up to 80% in critical care settings. Presentation of delirium can be hyperactive, hypoactive, or mixed, making identification and study challenging as patients with hypoactive delirium are less likely to come to attention in an inpatient or long-term care setting. Studies of delirium focus on prevention and treatment with nonpharmacological or medication interventions, with the preponderance of evidence favoring multi-component nonpharmacological approaches to prevention as the most effective. Though use of antipsychotic medication in delirium is common, existing evidence does not support routine use, showing no clear benefit in clinically significant outcome measures and with evidence of harm in some studies. We therefore suggest that antipsychotics be used to treat agitation, psychosis, and distress associated with delirium at the lowest effective doses and shortest possible duration and not be considered a treatment of delirium itself. Future studies may clarify the use of other agents, such as melatonin and melatonin receptor agonists, alpha-2 receptor agonists, and anti-epileptics.

Mitigating neurological, cognitive, and psychiatric sequelae of COVID-19-related critical illness

Despite advances in the treatment and mitigation of critical illness caused by infection with SARS-CoV-2, millions of survivors have a devastating, post-acute infection syndrome known as long COVID. A large proportion of patients with long COVID have nervous system dysfunction, which is also seen in the distinct but overlapping condition of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), putting survivors of COVID-19-related critical illness at high risk of long-lasting morbidity affecting multiple organ systems and, as a result, engendering measurable deficits in quality of life and productivity. In this Series paper, we discuss neurological, cognitive, and psychiatric sequelae in patients who have survived critical illness due to COVID-19. We review current knowledge of the epidemiology and pathophysiology of persistent neuropsychological impairments, and outline potential preventive strategies based on safe, evidence-based approaches to the management of pain, agitation, delirium, anticoagulation, and ventilator weaning during critical illness. We highlight priorities for current and future research, including possible therapeutic approaches, and offer considerations for health services to address the escalating health burden of long COVID.

Facilitators and Barriers Influencing Antipsychotic Medication Prescribing and Deprescribing Practices in Critically Ill Adult Patients: a Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic medications do not alter the incidence or duration of delirium, but these medications are frequently prescribed and continued at transitions of care in critically ill patients when they may no longer be necessary or appropriate.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify and describe relevant domains and constructs that influence antipsychotic medication prescribing and deprescribing practices among physicians, nurses, and pharmacists that care for critically ill adult patients during and following critical illness.

DESIGN

We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with critical care and ward healthcare professionals including physicians, nurses, and pharmacists to understand antipsychotic prescribing and deprescribing practices for critically ill adult patients during and following critical illness.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-one interviews were conducted with 11 physicians, five nurses, and five pharmacists from predominantly academic centres in Alberta, Canada, between July 6 and October 29, 2021.

MAIN MEASURES

We used deductive thematic analysis using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify and describe constructs within relevant domains.

KEY RESULTS

Seven TDF domains were identified as relevant from the analysis: Social/Professional role and identity; Beliefs about capabilities; Reinforcement; Motivations and goals; Memory, attention, and decision processes; Environmental context and resources; and Beliefs about consequences. Participants reported antipsychotic prescribing for multiple indications beyond delirium and agitation including patient and staff safety, sleep management, and environmental factors such as staff availability and workload. Participants identified potential antipsychotic deprescribing strategies to reduce ongoing antipsychotic medication prescriptions for critically ill patients including direct communication tools between prescribers at transitions of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Critical care and ward healthcare professionals report several factors influencing established antipsychotic medication prescribing practices. These factors aim to maintain patient and staff safety to facilitate the provision of care to patients with delirium and agitation limiting adherence to current guideline recommendations.

The efficacy and safety of haloperidol for the treatment of delirium in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Purpose

Delirium is common during critical illness and is associated with poor outcomes. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of haloperidol for the treatment of delirium in critically ill patients.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials enrolling critically ill adult patients to compare haloperidol with placebo were searched from inception through to February 20th, 2023. The primary outcome were delirium-free days and overall mortality, secondary outcomes were length of intensive care unit stay, length of hospital stay, and adverse events.

Results

Nine trials were included in our meta-analysis, with a total of 3,916 critically ill patients. Overall, the pooled analyses showed no significant difference between critically ill patients treated with haloperidol and placebo for the delirium-free days (MD -0.01, 95%CI -0.36 to 0.34, p = 0.95, I2 = 30%), overall mortality (OR 0.89, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.04, p = 0.14, I2 = 0%), length of intensive care unit stay (MD -0.06, 95%CI -0.16 to 0.03, p = 0.19, I2 = 0%), length of hospital stay (MD -0.06, 95%CI -0.61 to 0.49, p = 0.83, I2 = 0%), and adverse events (OR 0.90, 95%CI 0.60 to 1.37, p = 0.63, I2 = 0%).

Conclusion

Among critically ill patients, the use of haloperidol as compared to placebo has no significant effect on delirium-free days, overall mortality, length of intensive care unit and/or hospital stay. Moreover, the use of haloperidol did not increase the risk of adverse events.

Emerging Anesthetic Nanomedicines: Current State and Challenges

Anesthetics, which include both local and general varieties, are a unique class of drugs widely utilized in clinical surgery to alleviate pain and promote relaxation in patients. Although numerous anesthetics and their traditional formulations are available in the market, only a select few exhibit excellent anesthetic properties that meet clinical requirements. The main challenges are the potential toxic and adverse effects of anesthetics, as well as the presence of the blood-brain barrier (BBB), which makes it difficult for most general anesthetics to effectively penetrate to the brain. Loading anesthetics onto nanocarriers as anesthetic nanomedicines might address these challenges and improve anesthesia effectiveness, reduce toxic and adverse effects, while significantly enhance the efficiency of general anesthetics passing through the BBB. Consequently, anesthetic nanomedicines play a crucial role in the field of anesthesia. Despite their significance, research on anesthetic nanomedicines is still in its infancy, especially when compared to other types of nanomedicines in terms of depth and breadth. Although local anesthetic nanomedicines have received considerable attention and essentially meet clinical needs, there are few reported instances of nanomedicines for general anesthetics. Given the extensive usage of anesthetics and the many of them need for improved performance, emerging anesthetic nanomedicines face both unparalleled opportunities and considerable challenges in terms of theory and technology. Thus, a comprehensive summary with systematic analyses of anesthetic nanomedicines is urgently required. This review provides a comprehensive summary of the classification, properties, and research status of anesthetic nanomedicines, along with an exploration of their opportunities and challenges. In addition, future research directions and development prospects are discussed. It is hoped that researchers from diverse disciplines will collaborate to study anesthetic nanomedicines and develop them as a valuable anesthetic dosage form for clinical surgery.

Frailty, Acute Brain Dysfunction, and Posthospitalization Disability Outcomes in Critically Ill Older Adults

BACKGROUND

Identifying potentially modifiable factors that mediate adverse outcomes in frail adults with critical illness may facilitate development of interventions to improve intensive care unit (ICU) survivorship.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the relationship between frailty, acute brain dysfunction (as reflected by delirium or persistent coma), and 6-month disability outcomes.

METHODS

Older adults (aged ≥50 years) admitted to the ICU were enrolled prospectively. Frailty was identified with the Clinical Frailty Scale. Delirium and coma were assessed daily with the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU and the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, respectively. Disability outcomes (death and severe physical disability [defined as new dependence in 5 or more activities of daily living]) were assessed by telephone within 6 months after discharge.

RESULTS

In 302 older adults (mean [SD] age, 67.2 [10.8] y), both frail and vulnerable patients had a higher risk for acute brain dysfunction (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.9 [95% CI, 1.5-5.6], and 2.0 [95% CI, 1.0-4.1], respectively) compared with fit patients. Both frailty and acute brain dysfunction were independently associated with death or severe disability at 6 months (AOR, 3.3 [95% CI, 1.6-6.5] and 2.4 [95% CI, 1.4 -4.0], respectively). The average proportion of the frailty effect mediated by acute brain dysfunction was estimated to be 12.6% (95% CI, 2.1%-23.1%; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Frailty and acute brain dysfunction were important independent predictors of disability outcomes in older adults with critical illness. Acute brain dysfunction may be an important mediator of increased risk for physical disability outcomes after critical illness.

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.

Prevalence and Risk Factors for Intensive Care Unit Delirium After Traumatic Brain Injury: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Delirium remains understudied after traumatic brain injury (TBI). We sought to identify independent predictors of delirium among intensive care unit (ICU) patients with TBI.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study evaluated adult patients with TBI requiring ICU admission. Outcomes included delirium days within the first 14 days, as assessed by the Confusion Assessment Method-ICU (CAM-ICU). Models were adjusted for age, sex, insurance, Marshall head computed tomography classification, presence of subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), Injury Severity Score (ISS), need for cardiopulmonary resuscitation, maximum admission Glasgow Coma motor score, glucose level, hemoglobin level, and pupil reactivity.

RESULTS

Delirium prevalence was 60%, with a median duration of 4 days (interquartile range: 2-8) among ICU patients with TBI (n = 2,664). Older age, higher ISS, maximum motor score < 6, Marshall class II-IV, and SAH were associated with risk of increased delirium duration (all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large cohort, ICU delirium after TBI affected three of five patients for a median duration of 4 days. Age, general injury severity, motor score, and features of intracranial hemorrhage were predictive of more TBI-associated delirium days. Given the high prevalence of ICU delirium after TBI and its impact on hospitalization, further work is needed to understand the impact of delirium and TBI on outcomes and to determine whether delirium risk can be minimized.

Effect of early mobilisation on long-term cognitive impairment in critical illness in the USA: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Patients who have received mechanical ventilation can have prolonged cognitive impairment for which there is no known treatment. We aimed to establish whether early mobilisation could reduce the rates of cognitive impairment and other aspects of disability 1 year after critical illness.

METHODS

In this single-centre, parallel, randomised controlled trial, patients admitted to the adult medical-surgical intensive-care unit (ICU), at the University of Chicago (IL, USA), were recruited. Inclusion criteria were adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who were functionally independent and mechanically ventilated at baseline and within the first 96 h of mechanical ventilation, and expected to continue for at least 24 h. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via computer-generated permuted balanced block randomisation to early physical and occupational therapy (early mobilisation) or usual care. An investigator designated each assignment in consecutively numbered, sealed, opaque envelopes; they had no further involvement in the trial. Only the assessors were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was cognitive impairment 1 year after hospital discharge, measured with a Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Patients were assessed for cognitive impairment, neuromuscular weakness, institution-free days, functional independence, and quality of life at hospital discharge and 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01777035, and is now completed.

FINDINGS

Between Aug 11, 2011, and Oct 24, 2019, 1222 patients were screened, 200 were enrolled (usual care n=100, intervention n=100), and one patient withdrew from the study in each group; thus 99 patients in each group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (113 [57%] men and 85 [43%] women). 65 (88%) of 74 in the usual care group and 62 (89%) of 70 in the intervention group underwent testing for cognitive impairment at 1 year. The rate of cognitive impairment at 1 year with early mobilisation was 24% (24 of 99 patients) compared with 43% (43 of 99) with usual care (absolute difference -19·2%, 95% CI -32·1 to -6·3%; p=0·0043). Cognitive impairment was lower at hospital discharge in the intervention group (53 [54%] 99 patients vs 68 [69%] 99 patients; -15·2%, -28·6 to -1·7; p=0·029). At 1 year, the intervention group had fewer ICU-acquired weaknesses (none [0%] of 99 patients vs 14 [14%] of 99 patients; -14·1%; -21·0 to -7·3; p=0·0001) and higher physical component scores on quality-of-life testing than did the usual care group (median 52·4 [IQR 45·3-56·8] vs median 41·1 [31·8-49·4]; p<0·0001). There was no difference in the rates of functional independence (64 [65%] of 99 patients vs 61 [62%] of 99 patients; 3%, -10·4 to 16·5%; p=0·66) or mental component scores (median 55·9 [50·2-58·9] vs median 55·2 [49·5-59·7]; p=0·98) between the intervention and usual care groups at 1 year. Seven adverse events (haemodynamic changes [n=3], arterial catheter removal [n=1], rectal tube dislodgement [n=1], and respiratory distress [n=2]) were reported in six (6%) of 99 patients in the intervention group and in none of the patients in the usual care group (p=0·029).

INTERPRETATION

Early mobilisation might be the first known intervention to improve long-term cognitive impairment in ICU survivors after mechanical ventilation. These findings clearly emphasise the importance of avoiding delays in initiating mobilisation. However, the increased adverse events in the intervention group warrants further investigation to replicate these findings.

FUNDING

None.

An Interdisciplinary Reappraisal of Delirium and Proposed Subtypes

An interdisciplinary plenary session entitled "Rethinking and Rehashing Delirium" was held during the 2021 Annual Meeting of the Academy of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry to facilitate dialog on the prevalent approach to delirium. Panel members included a psychiatrist, neurointensivist, and critical care specialist, and attendee comments were solicited with the goal of developing a statement. Discussion was focused on a reappraisal of delirium and, in particular, its disparate terminology and history in relation to acute encephalopathy. The authors endorse a recent joint position statement that describes acute encephalopathy as a rapidly evolving (<4 weeks) pathobiological brain process that presents as subsyndromal delirium, delirium, or coma and suggest the following points of refinement: (1) to suggest that "delirium disorder" describe the diagnostic construct including its syndrome, precipitant(s), and unique pathophysiology; (2) to restrict the term "delirium" to describing the clinical syndrome encountered at the bedside; (3) to clarify that the disfavored term "altered mental status" may occasionally be an appropriate preliminary designation where the diagnosis cannot yet be specified further; and (4) to provide rationale for rejecting the terms acute brain injury, failure, or dysfunction. The final common pathway of delirium appears to involve higher-level brain network dysfunction, but there are many insults that can disrupt functional connectivity. We propose that future delirium classification systems should seek to characterize the unique pathophysiological disturbances ("endotypes") that underlie delirium and delirium's individual neuropsychiatric symptoms. We provide provisional means of classification in hopes that novel subtypes might lead to specific intervention to improve patient experience and outcomes. This paper concludes by considering future directions for the field. Key areas of opportunity include interdisciplinary initiatives to harmonize efforts across specialties and settings, enhance underrepresented groups in research, integration of delirium and encephalopathy in coding, development of relevant quality and safety measures, and exploration of opportunities for translational science.

Post-Intensive Care Syndrome in Patients Suffering From Acute Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: Results From an Outpatient Post-ICU Aftercare Clinic

Introduction Survivors of an acute subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) may suffer from a long-term neurological disability, cognitive impairment, anxiety, and depression, which can also be related to post-intensive care syndrome (PICS). The aim of this study was to examine the prevalence of PICS symptoms in post-intensive care (ICU) aftercare aSAH patients. Methods We conducted an observational cohort study in aSAH patients from a post-ICU aftercare clinic (ICU-AC). PICS symptoms were evaluated using the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and a medical questionnaire for physical and cognitive functioning. Results A total of 110 patients were included. The prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms was 23.6% and 19.1%, respectively. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was seen in 26.4%. Cognitive complaints were lack of concentration (63.6%), short-term memory loss (45.8%), and reduced speed of thinking (60.9%). The most reported physical complaints were fatigue (73.6%), limitations in daily activity (72.7%), muscle weakness (41.8%), pain (36.4%), and weight loss (30.9%). PICS symptoms related to all three domains were present in 30% of patients. Conclusion The prevalence of PICS in patients after aSAH is high. Even in patients without aSAH-related neurological impairment who were discharged home, a high prevalence of PICS symptoms was reported. Early screening for PICS should comprise all three domains and is important to facilitate a better tailored rehabilitation of these patients.

Enhancing the awakening to family engagement bundle with music therapy

Survivors of prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) admissions may present undesirable long-term outcomes. In particular, physical impairment and cognitive dysfunction have both been described in patients surviving episodes requiring mechanical ventilation and sedation. One of the strategies to prevent the aforementioned outcomes involves the implementation of a bundle composed by: (1) Spontaneous awakening trial; (2) Spontaneous breathing trial; (3) Choosing proper sedation strategies; (4) Delirium detection and management; (5) Early ICU mobility; and (6) Family engagement (ABCDEF bundle). The components of this bundle contribute in shortening length of stay on mechanical ventilation and reducing incidence of delirium. Since the first description of the ABCDEF bundle, other relevant therapeutic factors have been proposed, such as introducing music therapy. This mini-review describes the current evidence supporting the use of the ABCDEF bundle, as well as current knowledge on the implementation of music therapy.

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.

Pharmacologic Management of Intensive Care Unit Delirium and the Impact on the Duration of Delirium, Length of Intensive Care Unit Stay and 30-Day Mortality: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized-Control Trials

The present network meta-analysis was conducted to compare typical and atypical antipsychotics for the management of intensive care unit (ICU) delirium. The present meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two investigators systematically searched electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, for relevant studies in English from inception to February 15, 2023. The key terms used to search for relevant articles included "antipsychotic," "delirium," "randomized-controlled trials," and "efficacy." We used the term "randomized controlled trials (RCTs)" to limit the search to RCTs. The primary outcome was the duration of delirium in days. There were three predefined secondary outcomes included: mortality in 30 days, duration of mechanical ventilation in days, and length of ICU stay in days. A total of seven studies were included in the present meta-analysis. No significant difference was found between typical anti-psychotic, atypical anti-psychotic, and placebo in terms of duration of delirium, rate of mortality, duration of ICU stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation. In conclusion, this network meta-analysis comparing typical antipsychotic, atypical antipsychotic medications, and placebo on delirium in patients in the ICU did not find evidence that either typical or atypical antipsychotic medications led to a shorter duration of delirium. Patients who received treatment with typical or atypical antipsychotics and those who received a placebo had similar clinical outcomes, including mortality, length of stay in the ICU, and duration of ventilation.

Delirium-associated medication in people at risk: A systematic update review, meta-analyses, and GRADE-profiles

BACKGROUND

Drug-associated delirium is a common but potentially preventable neuropsychiatric syndrome associated with detrimental outcomes. Empirical evidence for delirium-associated medication is uncertain due to a lack of high-quality studies. We aimed to further investigate the body of evidence for drugs suspected to trigger delirium.

METHODS

A systematic update review and meta-analyses of prospective studies presenting drug associations with incident delirium in adult study populations was conducted. Two authors independently searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, and Google Scholar dated from October 1, 2009 to June 23, 2020, after screening a previous review published in 2011. The most reliable results on drug-delirium associations were pooled in meta-analyses using the random-effects model. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE-approach. This study is preregistered with OSF (DOI https://doi.org.10.17605/OSF.IO/4PUHY).

RESULTS

The 31 eligible studies, presenting results for 24 medication classes were identified. Meta-analyses and GRADE level of evidence ratings show no increased delirium risk for Haloperidol (OR: 0.96, 95% CI 0.72-1.28; high-quality evidence), Olanzapine (OR: 0.25, 95% CI 0.15-0.40), Ketamine (OR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.35-1.46) or corticosteroids (OR: 0.69, 95% CI 0.32-1.50; moderate quality evidence, respectively). Low-level evidence suggests a three-fold increased risk for anticholinergics (OR: 3.11, 95% CI 1.04-9.26). Opioids, benzodiazepines, H₁ -antihistamines, and antidepressants did not reach reliable evidence levels in our analyses.

CONCLUSION

We investigated the retrievable body of evidence for delirium-associated medication. The results of this systematic review were then interpreted in conjunction with other evidence-based works and guidelines providing conclusions for clinical decision-making.

Diagnosis of delirium: a practical approach

Delirium is an acute disorder of fluctuating attention and awareness with cardinal features that allow it to be positively distinguished from other causes of an acute confusional state. These features include fluctuations, prominent inattentiveness with other cognitive deficits, a change in awareness and visual hallucinations. We describe a framework for diagnosing delirium, noting the need to consider certain caveats and differential diagnoses. Delirium is a clinical diagnosis where a thorough history and clinical examination are much more helpful diagnostically than any single test or combination of tests.

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.

Pharmacologic Management of Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit

Delirium, often underdiagnosed in the intensive care unit, is a common complication of critical illness that contributes to significant morbidity and mortality. Clinicians should be aware of common risk factors and triggers and should work to mitigate these as much as possible to reduce the occurrence of delirium. This review first provides an overview of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, evaluation, and consequences of delirium in critically ill patients. Presented next is the current evidence for the pharmacologic management of delirium, focusing on prevention and treatment of delirium in the intensive care unit. It concludes by outlining some emerging treatments of delirium.

Early alteration of peripheral blood lymphocyte subsets as a risk factor for delirium in critically ill patients after cardiac surgery: A prospective observational study

Objective

There is a high incidence of delirium among patients with organ dysfunction undergoing cardiac surgery who need critical care. This study aimed to explore the risk factors for delirium in critically ill patients undergoing cardiac surgery and the predictive value of related risk factors.

Methods

We conducted a prospective observational study on adult critically ill patients who underwent cardiac surgery between January 2019 and August 2021. Patients were consecutively assigned to delirium and non-delirium groups. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic analysis were used to determine the risk factors for delirium. Receiver operating characteristic curves and a nomogram were used to identify the predictive value of related risk factors.

Results

Delirium developed in 242 of 379 (63.9%) participants. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores were 14.2 ± 5.6 and 18 ± 8.4, respectively. Patients with delirium had longer cardiopulmonary bypass time (149.6 ± 59.1 vs. 126.7 ± 48.5 min, p < 0.001) and aortic cross-clamp time (98.7 ± 51.5 vs. 86.1 ± 41.6 min, p = 0.010) compared with the non-delirium group. The area under the curve was 0.824 for CD4⁺ T cell count and 0.862 for CD4/CD8 ratio. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age [odds ratio (OR) 1.030, p = 0.038], duration of physical restraint (OR 1.030, p < 0.001), interleukin-6 (OR 1.001, p = 0.025), CD19⁺ B cell count (OR 0.996, p = 0.016), CD4⁺ T cell count (OR 1.005, p < 0.001) and CD4/CD8 ratio (OR 5.314, p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for delirium. A nomogram revealed that age, cardiopulmonary bypass duration, CD4⁺ T cell count and CD4/CD8 ratio were independent predictors of delirium.

Conclusion

Age, duration of physical restraint, CD4⁺ T cell count and CD4/CD8 ratio were reliable factors for predicting delirium in critically ill patients after cardiac surgery. The receiver operating characteristic curves and nomogram suggested a potential role for CD4⁺ T cells in mediating potential neuroinflammation of delirium.

Delirium severity does not differ between medical and surgical intensive care units after adjusting for medication use

Severe delirium is associated with an increased risk of mortality, institutionalization, and length of stay. Few studies have examined differences in delirium severity between different populations of critically ill patients. The objective of the study was to compare delirium severity and the presence of the four core features between adults in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU) and medical intensive care unit (MICU) while controlling for variables known to be associated with delirium. This is a secondary analysis of two parallel randomized multi-center trials conducted from March 2009 to January 2015 at 3 Indianapolis hospitals. A total of 474 adults with delirium were included in the analysis. Subjects were randomized in a 1:1 ratio in random blocks of 4 by a computer program. Patients were randomized to either haloperidol prescribing or de-prescribing regimen vs usual care. Delirium severity was assessed daily or twice-daily using the CAM-ICU-7 beginning after 24 h of ICU admission and until discharge from the hospital, death, or 30 days after enrollment. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, hospital and 30-day mortality, and delirium-related adverse events. These outcomes were compared between SICU and MICU settings for this secondary analysis. Out of 474 patients, 237 were randomized to intervention. At study enrollment, the overall cohort had a mean age of 59 (SD 16) years old, was 54% female, 44% African-American, and 81% were mechanically ventilated upon enrollment. MICU participants were significantly older and severely ill with a higher premorbid cognitive and physical dysfunction burden. In univariate analysis, SICU participants had significantly higher mean total CAM-ICU-7 scores, corresponding to delirium severity, (4.15 (2.20) vs 3.60 (2.32), p = 0.02), and a lower mean RASS score (- 1.79 (1.28) vs - 1.53 (1.27), p < 0.001) compared to MICU participants. Following adjustment for benzodiazepines and opioids, delirium severity did not significantly differ between groups. The presence of Feature 3, altered level of consciousness, was significantly associated with the SICU participants, identifying as Black, premorbid functional impairment, benzodiazepines, opioids, and dexmedetomidine. In this secondary analysis examining differences in delirium severity between MICU and SICU participants, we did not identify a difference between participant populations following adjustment for administered benzodiazepines and opioids. We did identify that an altered level of consciousness, core feature 3 of delirium, was associated with SICU setting, identifying as Black, activities of daily living, benzodiazepines and opioid medications. These results suggest that sedation practice patterns play a bigger role in delirium severity than the underlying physiologic insult, and expression of core features of delirium may vary based on individual factors.Trial registration CT#: NCT00842608.

Baseline Anxiety and Depression and Risk for ICU Delirium: A Prospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES:

Anxiety and depression are common mental disorders in adults admitted to the ICU. Although depression increases postsurgical delirium and anxiety does not, their associations with ICU delirium in critically ill adults remain unclear. We evaluated the association between ICU baseline anxiety and depression and ICU delirium occurrence.

DESIGN:

Subgroup analysis of a prospective cohort study.

SETTING:

Single, 36-bed mixed ICU.

PATIENTS:

Nine-hundred ninety-one ICU patients admitted with or without delirium between July 2016 and February 2020; patients admitted after elective surgery or not assessed for anxiety/depression were excluded.

INTERVENTION:

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTs:

The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale questionnaire was administered at ICU admission to determine baseline anxiety and depression. All patients were assessed with the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) q8h; greater than or equal to 1 +CAM-ICU assessment and/or scheduled antipsychotic use represented a delirium day. Multivariable logistic and Quasi-Poisson regression models, adjusted for ICU days and nine delirium risk variables (“Pre-ICU”: age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, cognitive impairment; “ICU baseline”: Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-IV, admission type; “Daily ICU”: opioid and/or benzodiazepine use, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, coma), were used to evaluate associations between baseline anxiety and/or depression and ICU delirium. Among the 991 patients, 145 (14.6%) had both anxiety and depression, 78 (7.9%) had anxiety only, 91 (9.2%) had depression only, and 677 (68.3%) had neither. Delirium occurred in 406 of 991 total cohort (41.0%) patients; in the baseline anxiety and depression group, it occurred in 78 of 145 (53.8%), in the anxiety only group, 37 of 78 (47.4%), in the depression only group, 39 of 91 (42.9%), and in the group with neither in 252 of 677 (37.2%). Presence of both baseline anxiety and depression was associated with greater delirium occurrence (adjusted odds ratio, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.10–3.53; p = 0.02) and duration (adjusted risk ratio, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.17–2.23; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS:

Baseline anxiety and depression are associated with increased ICU delirium occurrence and should be considered when delirium risk reduction strategies are being formulated.

Practicalities of Impracticability: An Interim Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Impracticability is an ethical standard for waiver of informed consent in research. We examine how well the criterion of impracticability appears to have been fulfilled in a set of 36 completed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that secured consent from some subjects or LARs and employed waivers to enroll others. These trials were identified among 155 RCTs using waivers of consent in a convenience sample drawn from 7 systematic reviews. Recruitment data were available for 19 of the 36 trials, revealing an average of 41.6% of subjects (range 0.2-98.7%, 95% CI: 24.8-58.4%) were enrolled without consent. Six trials enrolled less than 10% of subjects without consent and an overlapping set of 9 trials sought consent from all subjects or LARs at some sites while waiving consent at other sites. We question whether these trials were practicable without waivers and identify issues for consideration by investigators and ethics review boards.

False-positive and false-negative risks for individual multicentre trials in critical care

Background

In medical research, null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) is the dominant framework for statistical inference. NHST involves calculating P-values and confidence intervals to quantify the evidence against the null hypothesis of no effect. However, P-values and confidence intervals cannot tell us the probability that the hypothesis is true. In contrast, false-positive risk (FPR) and false-negative risk (FNR) are post-test probabilities concerning the truth of the hypothesis, that is to say, the probability a real effect exists.

Methods

We calculated the FPR or FNR for 53 individual multicentre trials in critical care based on a pretest probability of 0.5 that the hypothesis was true.

Results

For trials reporting statistical significance, the FPR varied between 0.1% and 57.6%. For trials reporting non-significance, the FNR varied between 1.7% and 36.9%. Twenty-six of 47 trials (55.3%) reporting non-significance provided strong or very strong evidence in favour of the null hypothesis; the remaining trials provided limited evidence. There was no obvious relationship between the P-value and the FNR.

Conclusions

The FPR and FNR showed marked variability, indicating that the probability of a real or absent treatment effect differed substantially between trials. Only one trial reporting statistical significance provided convincing evidence of a real treatment effect, and nearly half of all trials reporting non-significance provided limited evidence for the absence of a treatment effect. Our findings suggest that the quality of evidence from multicentre trials in critical care is highly variable.

Serum Biomarkers in Postoperative Delirium After Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is associated with postoperative delirium, but its pathophysiology is not well defined. We conducted this study to measure the relationship among serum biomarkers of inflammation and neuronal injury and delirium incidence and severity in a cohort of esophagectomy patients.

METHODS

Blood samples were obtained from patients preoperatively and on postoperative days 1 and 3 and were analyzed for S100 calcium-binding protein B, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin (IL) 8 and IL-10, tumor necrosis factor-α, and insulin-like growth factor 1. Delirium was assessed twice daily using the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale and Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit. Delirium severity was assessed once daily with the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98.

RESULTS

Samples from 71 patients were included. Preoperative biomarker concentrations were not associated with postoperative delirium. Significant differences in change in concentrations from preoperatively to postoperative day 1 were seen in IL-8 (delirium, 38.6; interquartile range [IQR], 29.3-69.8; no delirium, 24.8; IQR, 16.0-41.7, P = .022), and IL-10 (delirium, 26.1; IQR, 13.9-36.7; no delirium, 12.4; IQR, 7.7-25.7; P = .025). Greater postoperative increase in S100 calcium-binding protein B (Spearman r = 0.289, P = .020) and lower levels of insulin-like growth factor 1 were correlated with greater delirium severity (Spearman r = -0.27, P = .040). Greater CRP change quartiles were associated with higher delirium incidence adjusting for severity of illness (odds ratio, 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.75; P = .037) or comorbidities (odds ratio, 1.70; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.76, P = .030).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in change in serum CRP, IL-8, and IL-10 concentrations were associated with postoperative delirium, suggesting biomarker measurement early in the postoperative course is associated with delirium.

2021 KSCCM clinical practice guidelines for pain, agitation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disturbance in the intensive care unit

We revised and expanded the “2010 Guideline for the Use of Sedatives and Analgesics in the Adult Intensive Care Unit (ICU).” We revised the 2010 Guideline based mainly on the 2018 “Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption (PADIS) in Adult Patients in the ICU,” which was an updated 2013 pain, agitation, and delirium guideline with the inclusion of two additional topics (rehabilitation/mobility and sleep). Since it was not possible to hold face-to-face meetings of panels due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, all discussions took place via virtual conference platforms and e-mail with the participation of all panelists. All authors drafted the recommendations, and all panelists discussed and revised the recommendations several times. The quality of evidence for each recommendation was classified as high (level A), moderate (level B), or low/very low (level C), and all panelists voted on the quality level of each recommendation. The participating panelists had no conflicts of interest on related topics. The development of this guideline was independent of any industry funding. The Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility (rehabilitation/mobilization), and Sleep Disturbance panels issued 42 recommendations (level A, 6; level B, 18; and level C, 18). The 2021 clinical practice guideline provides up-to-date information on how to prevent and manage pain, agitation/sedation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disturbance in adult ICU patients. We believe that these guidelines can provide an integrated method for clinicians to manage PADIS in adult ICU patients.

Approaches to multiplicity in publicly funded pragmatic randomised controlled trials: a survey of clinical trials units and a rapid review of published trials

Background

Opinions and practices vary around the issue of performing multiple statistical tests in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We carried out a study to collate information about opinions and practices using a methodological rapid review and a survey, specifically of publicly funded pragmatic RCTs that are not seeking marketing authorisation. The aim was to identify the circumstances under which researchers would make a statistical adjustment for multiplicity.

Methods

A review was performed extracting information from articles reporting primary analyses of pragmatic RCTs in one of seven high quality medical journals, in January to June (inclusive) 2018. A survey (Survey Monkey) eliciting opinions and practices around multiplicity was distributed to the 47 registered clinical trials units (CTUs) in the UK.

Results

One hundred and thirty-eight RCTs were included in the review, and survey responses were received from 27/47 (57%) CTUs. Both the review and survey indicated that adjusting for multiplicity was considered most important for multiple treatment comparisons; adjustment was performed for 11/23 (48%) published trials, and 24/27 (89%) CTU statisticians reported they would consider adjustment. Opinions and practices varied around adjustment for multiplicity arising from multiple primary outcomes and interim analyses. Adjustment was considered less important for multiplicity due to multiple secondary outcomes (adjustment performed for 17/136 [13%] published trials and 3/27 [11%] CTU statisticians would consider adjustment) and subgroup analyses (8/85 [9%] published trials adjusted and 6/27 CTU [22%] statisticians would consider adjustment).

Conclusions

There is variation in opinions about adjustment for multiplicity among both statisticians reporting RCTs and applied statisticians working in CTUs. Further guidance is needed on the circumstances in which adjustment should be considered in relation to primary trial hypotheses, and if there are any situations in which adjustment would be recommended in the context of secondary analyses.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01525-9.

Differential Effects of Gamma-Aminobutyric Acidergic Sedatives on Risk of Post-Extubation Delirium in the ICU: A Retrospective Cohort Study From a New England Health Care Network

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether different gamma-aminobutyric acidergic (GABAergic) sedatives such as propofol and benzodiazepines carry differential risks of post-extubation delirium in the ICU.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Seven ICUs in an academic hospital network, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (Boston, MA).

PATIENTS

Ten thousand five hundred and one adult patients mechanically ventilated for over 24 hours.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We tested the hypothesis that benzodiazepine versus propofol-based sedation is associated with fewer delirium-free days within 14 days after extubation. Further, we hypothesized that the measured sedation level evoked by GABAergic drugs is a better predictor of delirium than the drug dose administered. The proportion of GABAergic drug-induced deep sedation was defined as the ratio of days with a mean Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale of less than or equal to -3 during mechanical ventilation. Multivariable regression and effect modification analyses were used. Delirium-free days were lower in patients who received a high proportion of deep sedation using benzodiazepine compared with propofol-based sedation (adjusted absolute difference, -1.17 d; 95% CI, -0.64 to -1.69; p < 0.001). This differential effect was magnified in elderly patients (age > 65) and in patients with liver or kidney failure (p-for-interaction < 0.001) but not observed in patients who received a low proportion of deep sedation (p = 0.95). GABAergic-induced deep sedation days during mechanical ventilation was a better predictor of post-extubation delirium than the GABAergic daily average effective dose (area under the curve 0.76 vs 0.69; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Deep sedation during mechanical ventilation with benzodiazepines compared with propofol is associated with increased risk of post-extubation delirium. Our data do not support the view that benzodiazepine-based compared with propofol-based sedation in the ICU is an independent risk factor of delirium, as long as deep sedation can be avoided in these patients.

Effects of Atorvastatin Therapy on Postoperative Delirium After Malignant Tumor Surgeries in Older Adults

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative delirium (POD) is one of the prevalent and potentially fatal clinical conditions, leading to high disability and mortality in older patients, as well as increased duration of hospital stay and more hospitalization expenses. There were no effective drugs in the clinical management of POD, and an absence of evidence-based medicine concerning the treatment of POD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present study explored whether atorvastatin (Ato) can decrease the occurrence rate of POD. The present research included patients over the age of 60 who were hospitalized to critical care units (ICUs) following surgery for malignant tumors. Patients received Ato (40mg/day) or placebos utilizing a computer-based random sequencing (in a 1:1 ratio). The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of delirium within the first seven days following surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 230 individuals were classified into two groups, namely the placebo group (n=123) and the Ato group (n=107). Patients belonging to two groups had similar baseline clinical data, and there were no statistically significant differences between them. The occurrence of delirium in the Ato group was remarkably reduced unlike the case in the placebo group. 30-day all-cause mortality did not vary significantly between the two groups. Pulmonary infection and Bedsore were significantly decreased in the Ato group than the placebo group, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in rhabdomyolysis and abnormal liver enzymes. In terms of medication responses, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups. Ato patients had remarkably shortened hospital stays and spent remarkably less on hospitalization expenditures in comparison with those in the placebo group.

CONCLUSION

The findings from the present research indicated that Ato can decrease the occurrence of delirium following surgical operation of malignant tumors among elderly patients, it also can reduce the duration of hospitalization, hospital cost, and post-surgical complications, but not improve 30-day all-cause mortality.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR-IPR-17011984.

Treatment of Delirium During Critical Illness

Delirium, an acute disturbance in mental status due to another medical condition, is common and morbid in the intensive care unit. Despite its clear association with multiple common risk factors and important outcomes, including mortality and long-term cognitive impairment, both the ultimate causes of and ideal treatments for delirium remain unclear. Studies suggest that neuroinflammation, hypoxia, alterations in energy metabolism, and imbalances in multiple neurotransmitter pathways contribute to delirium, but commonly used treatments (e.g., antipsychotic medications) target only one or a few of these potential mechanisms and are not supported by evidence of efficacy. At this time, the optimal treatment for delirium during critical illness remains avoidance of risk factors, though ongoing trials may expand on the promise shown by agents such as melatonin and dexmedetomidine. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Medicine, Volume 73 is January 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Exploring Ketamine Analgosedation Use and Its Effect on Incident Delirium in Critically Ill Adults

Ketamine is increasingly being used for analgosedation, but its effect on delirium remains unclear. We compared delirium risk variables and ketamine analgosedation use between adults who developed incident delirium and those who did not, evaluated whether ketamine analgosedation increases delirium risk, and compared ICU delirium characteristics, treatments, and outcomes between ketamine and nonketamine patients with delirium.

DESIGN

Secondary, subgroup analysis of a cohort study.

SETTING

Single, 36-bed mixed medical-surgical ICU in the Netherlands from July 2016 to February 2020.

PATIENTS

Consecutive adults were included. Patients admitted after elective surgery, not expected to survive greater than or equal to 48 hours, admitted with delirium, or where delirium occurred prior to ketamine use were excluded.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Trained ICU nurses evaluated patients without coma (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale. -4/-5) every 8 hours with the Confusion Assessment Method ICU; a delirium day was defined by greater than or equal to1 + Confusion Assessment Method ICU and/or scheduled antipsychotic use. Among 11 variables compared between the delirium and nondelirium groups (Baseline: age, Charlson Comorbidity score, cognitive impairment, admission type, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-IV score, daily ICU [until delirium occurrence or discharge]: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, coma, benzodiazepine, opioid, and ketamine use) and total ICU days, 7 (age, Charlson score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, coma, benzodiazepine, opioid, and ketamine use) were significantly different and were entered, along with delirium occurrence, in a logistic regression model. A total of 332 of 925 of patients (36%) developed delirium. Ketamine use was greater in patients with delirium (54 [16%] vs 4 [0.7%]; p < 0.01). Ketamine use (adjusted odds ratio, 5.60; 95% CI, 1.09-29.15), age (adjusted odds ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06), coma (adjusted odds ratio, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.15-3.78), opioid use (adjusted odds ratio, 171.17; 95% CI, 66.45-553.68), and benzodiazepine use (adjusted odds ratio, 34.07; 95% CI, 8.12-235.34) were each independently and significantly associated with increased delirium. Delirium duration, motoric subtype, delirium treatments, and outcomes were not different between the ketamine and nonketamine groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Ketamine analgosedation may contribute to increased ICU delirium. The characteristics of ketamine and nonketamine delirium are similar. Further prospective research is required to evaluate the magnitude of risk for delirium with ketamine use.