Benzodiazepines for treatment of patients with delirium excluding those who are cared for in an intensive care unit

Core outcome set for studies evaluating interventions to prevent or treat delirium in long-term care older residents: international key stakeholder informed consensus study

BACKGROUND

Trials of interventions to prevent or treat delirium in older adults resident in long-term care settings (LTC) report heterogenous outcomes, hampering the identification of effective management strategies for this important condition. Our objective was to develop international consensus among key stakeholders for a core outcome set (COS) for future trials of interventions to prevent and/or treat delirium in this population.

METHODS

We used a rigorous COS development process including qualitative interviews with family members and staff with experience of delirium in LTC; a modified two-round Delphi survey; and virtual consensus meetings using nominal group technique. The study was registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative (https://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/796).

RESULTS

Item generation identified 22 delirium-specific outcomes and 32 other outcomes from 18 qualitative interviews. When combined with outcomes identified in our earlier systematic review, and following an item reduction step, this gave 43 outcomes that advanced to the formal consensus processes. These involved 169 participants from 12 countries, and included healthcare professionals (121, 72%), researchers (24, 14%), and family members/people with experience of delirium (24, 14%). Six outcomes were identified as essential to include in all trials of interventions for delirium in LTC, and were therefore included in the COS. These are: 'delirium occurrence'; 'delirium related distress'; 'delirium severity'; 'cognition including memory', 'admission to hospital' and 'mortality'.

CONCLUSIONS

This COS, endorsed by the American Delirium Society and the European and Australasian Delirium Associations, is recommended for use in future clinical trials evaluating delirium prevention or treatment interventions for older adults residing in LTC.

Challenges in diagnosis and management of delirium in Lewy body disease

BACKGROUND

Delirium is an acute onset and fluctuating impairment of cognition, attention and arousal, often precipitated by acute illness. Lewy body disease (LBD) is an umbrella term for a range of clinical conditions, including Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). People living with LBD seem to be more susceptible to delirium than those with other subtypes of dementia.

AIM

To describe the challenges in clinical diagnosis and management of LBD.

METHODS

A systematic review of published literature on diagnosis and management of delirium in LBD.

RESULTS

Delirium is particularly challenging to diagnose in LBD as many of the clinical characteristics which define delirium such as inattention, fluctuating arousal, complex visual hallucinations and delusions, are also common to LBD. Distinguishing delirium from LBD can be very difficult clinically especially in the prodromal stages. Both under and over diagnosis of delirium, and under and over treatment of the symptoms have the potential to compromise the care and safety of people with a diagnosed or undiagnosed LBD. Clinicians are currently working with an extremely limited set of evidence-based management options for those with delirium in the context of a LBD diagnosis. For patients with LBD and their families this is an area of clinical practice that needs focused research.

Efficacy and Safety of Remimazolam Besylate versus Dexmedetomidine for Sedation in Non-Intubated Older Patients with Agitated Delirium After Orthopedic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of remimazolam besylate compared with dexmedetomidine for the relief of agitated delirium in non-intubated older patients after orthopedic surgery.

Patients and methods

Seventy-five patients were randomly divided into two groups. Patients assigned to the remimazolam group received a loading dose of 0.075 mg/kg remimazolam besylate over 1 minute, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.1 to 0.3 mg/kg/h. Subjects randomized to the dexmedetomidine group received a loading infusion of 0.5 μg/kg dexmedetomidine over 10 minutes, followed by a maintenance dose of 0.2 to 0.7 μg/kg/h. Meanwhile, RASS score-guided dose titration was followed. To assess the efficacy of the study drugs in terms of time to resolution of agitation, time to first achievement of target sedation, percentage of time within the target sedation range, and time to delirium resolution. Safety of the sedatives was evaluated by adverse events during hospitalization.

Results

Time to resolution of agitation did not differ between the two groups. The time to first achievement of target sedation was 19.0 (9.5 to 31.0) minutes for remimazolam besylate vs 43.5 (15.0 to 142.5) minutes for dexmedetomidine (P < 0.001). Percentage of time within the target sedation range was 77.8% for remimazolam besylate-treated patients and 67.4% for dexmedetomidine-treated patients (P = 0.001). Patients in the remimazolam group had longer time to delirium resolution (29.5 [21.3 to 32.5] hours) than those in the dexmedetomidine group (22.8 [18.9 to 28.5] hours) (P = 0.042). Patients sedated with remimazolam besylate had more oversedation (P = 0.036) but less hypotension (P = 0.007).

Conclusion

Compared with dexmedetomidine, remimazolam besylate was equally effective in relieving agitation, and resulted in earlier achievement of sedation goal and more controllable sedation. Remimazolam may be an ideal agent for obtaining rapid tranquillisation.

Adaptation, implementation, and mixed methods evaluation of an interprofessional modular clinical practice guideline for delirium management on an inpatient palliative care unit

BACKGROUND

Using delirium clinical guidelines may align interprofessional clinical practice and improve the care of delirious patients and their families. The aim of this project was to adapt, implement and evaluate an interprofessional modular delirium clinical practice guideline for an inpatient palliative care unit.

METHODS

The setting was a 31-bed adult inpatient palliative care unit within a university-affiliated teaching hospital. Participants for the evaluation were interprofessional team members. Using integration of guideline adaptation and an education initiative, an interprofessional guideline adaptation group developed a face-to-face 'starter kit' module and four online self-learning modules. The mixed methods evaluation comprised pre-and post-implementation review of electronic patient records, an online survey, and analysis of focus groups/ interviews using an iterative, inductive thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

Guideline implementation took 12 months. All palliative care unit staff attended a 'starter kit' session. Overall completion rate of the four e-Learning modules was 80.4%. After guideline implementation, nursing documentation of non-pharmacological interventions occurring before medication administration was observed. There was 60% less scheduled antipsychotic use and an increase in 'as needed' midazolam use. The online survey response rate was 32% (25/77). Most participants viewed the guideline's implementation favourably. Six key themes emerged from the qualitative analysis of interviews and focus groups with ten participants: prior delirium knowledge or experiences, challenges of facilitating change, impacts on practice, collaborative effort of change, importance of standardized guidelines, and utility of guideline elements.

CONCLUSIONS

Guideline implementation warrants concerted effort, time, and management support. Interprofessional team support facilitates the modular approach of guideline adaptation and implementation, leading to a change in clinical practice.

Benzodiazepine Use and Morbidity-Mortality Outcomes in a Geriatric Palliative Care Unit: A Retrospective Review

INTRODUCTION

Patients often experience delirium at the end of life. Benzodiazepine use may be associated with an increased risk of developing delirium. Alternate medications used in conjunction with benzodiazepines may serve as an independent precipitant of delirium. The aim is to understand the role of benzodiazepines in precipitating delirium and advanced mortality in palliative care population at the end of life.

METHODS

A retrospective medical chart review was conducted at a hospice and palliative care inpatient unit between the periods of June 2017-December 2017 and October 2017-November 2018. It included patients in hospice and palliative care inpatient units who received a benzodiazepine and those who did not. Patient characteristics, as well as Palliative Performance Scale score, diagnosis, and occurrence of admission, terminal, and/or recurrent delirium, were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Use of a benzodiazepine was not significantly associated with overall mortality nor cause-specific death without terminal delirium rate. However, it was significantly associated with higher cause-specific death with terminal delirium rate and a higher recurrent delirium rate.

DISCUSSION

This retrospective chart review suggests an association between benzodiazepine use and specific states of delirium and cause-specific death. However, it does not provide strong evidence on the use of this drug, especially at the end of life, as it pertains to the overall mortality rate. Suggested is a contextual approach to the use of benzodiazepines and the need to consider Palliative Performance Scale score and goals of care in the administration of this drug at varying periods during patient length of stay.

Evidence-Based Guideline on Management of Postoperative Delirium in Older People for Low Resource Setting: Systematic Review Article

Background

Postoperative delirium is the highest prevalence and life-threatening complication following geriatric surgery. The overall incidence rate varies from 5% to 52% of hospitalized surgical patients based on the type of surgery that often began in the postanesthesia care unit and continues up to 5 days post-surgery. Postoperative delirium manifests as a hypoactive, hyperactive and mixed subtype. The mechanism of delirium development is not clear, but it is accepted that delirium is a result of the patient's underlying vulnerabilities or risk factors combined with an outside stressor such as infection or surgery.

Objective

To develop evidence-based recommendations for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of postoperative delirium.

Methods

Literature was searched from PubMed, CINAH, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases that are published from 2010 to 2021 by formulating inclusion and exclusion criteria. Filtering was made depending on methodological quality, outcome, and data on population. Finally, 11 meta-analysis, 11 systematic reviews, 7 interventional studies, 11 observational studies, and recommendations of the previous clinical practice guideline developed by the American and European are included in this review.

Results

A total of 43 studies were considered in this evaluation. The development of this guideline was based on nine studies on risk stratification for postoperative delirium, eighteen studies on risk minimization and prevention for postoperative delirium, five studies on diagnosis for postoperative delirium, and eleven studies on treatments for postoperative delirium.

Conclusion

Postoperative delirium management can be categorized into risk assessment, risk minimization, early diagnosis, and treatment. Early diagnosis is critical to trigger focused and effective treatment. Non-pharmacological interventions are the first-line management for both hypoactive and hyperactive postoperative with considering contributory factors and underlying causes. Antipsychotics should only be used for hyperactive delirium individuals who try to harm themselves. Current evidence suggested that dexmedetomidine can be used as a treatment option for postoperative delirium.

Dementia Clinical Care in Relation to COVID-19

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review discusses the complex relationship between COVID-19 and dementia and how the pandemic has affected the management of patients with dementia. This population resulted particularly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and its effects and also to the negative effects of the measures taken worldwide to control the spread of the virus.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with dementia were at increased risk for COVID-19 compared to patients without dementia, and diagnosis of dementia represents an independent risk factor for hospitalization in COVID-19 patients. Mortality due to SARS-CoV2 infection in subjects with dementia is 2-5 times higher than in the general population. Cognitive impairment and delirium have been described in COVID-19 survivors. SARS-COV2 pandemic exacerbates the vulnerability of dementia patients and their caregivers, due to the morbidity and mortality from COVID-19, the indirect effects of the pandemic on the social supports, and the effects on healthcare system on which they depend.

SUMMARY

The COVID-19 pandemic requires people with dementia to move from traditional models of health care to innovative models for home care, to support caregivers' burden, and to improve long term care.

Diagnosis and Risk Factors for Delirium in Elderly Patients in the Emergency Rooms and Intensive Care Unit of the National Geriatric Hospital Emergency Department: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study

Purpose

To diagnose delirium and identify risk factors for its development in elderly patients in the emergency department (ED) and intensive care units (ICU) at the National Geriatric Hospital (Vietnam).

Patients and Methods

A cross-sectional observational study was conducted with a convenience sample of non-surgical patients admitted to ED and ICU at Hanoi National Geriatric Hospital in Vietnam. In total, 163 patients met the selection criteria and were included in the study. Screening involved using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) and the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU). The diagnosis was established according to the DSM-5 and ICD-10 codes.

Results

Delirium was found in a total of 106 (63.1%) patients. The factors significantly affecting its development were vision impairment (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.5 to 7.4, P=0.003), hearing impairment (OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.77 to 7.36, P=0.0001), acute or chronic kidney failure (OR, 7.1; 95% CI, 2.05 to 6.39, P<0.001), respiratory disorders (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.4 to 5.2, P=0.004), and malnutrition (OR, 9.17; 95% CI, 3.43–24.5, P=0.0001). The list also include the fall risk factors (OR, 12.2; 95% CI, 4.1–36.3, P=0.0001), frailty (OR, 8.35; 95% CI, 3.4–20.6, P=0.0001), activities of daily living (OR, 8.35; 95% CI, 3.4–20.6, P=0.0001), hyponatremia (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.07 to 5.75, P=0.001), hypernatremia (OR, 13.1; 95% CI, 1.67 to 2.5, P=0.001), and treatment interventions. In addition, delirium was linked to the duration of ICU admission (OR, 6.53; 95% CI, 4.5–25.5, P < 0.0001).

Conclusion

The CAM/CAM-ICU diagnostic algorithm makes it possible to diagnose delirium successfully. The present study confirmed the role of several premorbid and triggering factors in the occurrence of delirium in elderly patients in ED and ICU. There is a need for further research into risk factors for delirium in elderly patients.

The Relevance and Added Value of Geriatric Medicine (GM): Introducing GM to Non-Geriatricians

Geriatric Medicine (GM) holds a crucial role in promoting health and managing the complex medical, cognitive, social, and psychological issues of older people. However, basic principles of GM, essential for optimizing the care of older people, are commonly unknown or undermined, especially in countries where GM is still under development. This narrative review aims at providing insights into the role of GM to non-geriatrician readers and summarizing the main aspects of the added value of a geriatric approach across the spectrum of healthcare. Health practitioners of all specialties are frequently encountered with clinical conditions, common in older patients (such as cancer, hypertension, delirium, major neurocognitive and mental health disorders, malnutrition, and peri-operative complications), which could be more appropriately managed under the light of the approach of GM. The role of allied health professionals with specialized knowledge and skills in dealing with older people's issues is essential, and a multidisciplinary team is required for the delivery of optimal care in response to the needs and aspirations of older people. Thus, countries should assure the educational background of all health care providers and the specialized health and social care services required to meet the demands of a rapidly aging society.

Antipsychotics and Lorazepam During Delirium: Are We Harming Older Patients? A Real-Life Data Study

BACKGROUND

Delirium affects approximately one out of three older hospitalized patients and is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Approaches used to manage delirium consist of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions. Antipsychotics and lorazepam are commonly used to treat symptoms of delirium, but conflicting data exist on the effect of these drugs on the outcomes of delirium.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the use of antipsychotics, with or without lorazepam, increases the risk of prolonged hospital stay, post-discharge institutionalization, and in-hospital mortality in older patients with delirium.

METHODS

In this retrospective chart review study, we included acutely ill patients aged ≥ 65 years who were admitted to a geriatric ward and diagnosed with delirium. Patients were stratified into three groups based on whether or not they received antipsychotics and lorazepam to manage delirium: (0) no antipsychotics; (1) antipsychotics only; and (2) antipsychotics plus lorazepam. Length of hospital stay (LOS) and frequencies of post-discharge institutionalization and in-hospital mortality were compared.

RESULTS

In total, 212 patients with delirium were included (mean age 81.9 ± 5.6 years); 40 did not receive antipsychotics (18.9%), 123 received antipsychotics only (58.0%) and 49 received antipsychotics and lorazepam (23.1%). There was a trend to a longer LOS in patients who received both antipsychotics and lorazepam (median LOS group 0 = 8.0 days, group 1 = 10.0 days, and group 2 = 12.0 days). Furthermore, trends to a higher incidence of post-discharge institutionalization and in-hospital mortality were observed in patients who received both treatments (institutionalization group 0 = 45.0%, group 1 = 59.3%, group 2 = 81.6%; and in-hospital mortality group 0 = 7.5%, group 1 = 10.6%, group 2 = 16.3%).

CONCLUSION

The use of antipsychotics, with or without lorazepam, during delirium is associated with increased risks of poor outcomes. These findings suggest that clinicians should be cautious about routine prescribing of these drugs to older patients with delirium. Further investigation is needed to clarify this association.