Delirium assessed by Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale in advanced cancer patients admitted to an acute palliative/supportive care unit

Incidence of delirium in older people with cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Delirium is a prevalent neuropsychiatric syndrome in older people with cancer. However, there are no meta-analyses assessing its incidence exclusively in this population. This study aims to assess the incidence proportion of delirium in older people with cancer in the hospital area.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out. MEDLINE, Scopus, and EBSCO were searched from inception to December 2021. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Inclusion criteria were original peer-reviewed studies with experimental (randomised controlled trials), observational, and cross-sectional designs assessing delirium older inpatients (≥65 years) with oncological diseases in medical and post-surgical hospital areas and using validated screening or diagnostic methods. A web-based system was used to manage the screening process. Study quality was assessed with Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools. The statistical analysis was performed in RevMan v5.4.0 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK), using a random-effects model to calculate incidence and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Based on 37 included articles, the incidence proportion of delirium ranged from 3.8% to 61.4%, in a total of 11,847 older patients with cancer. Meta-analysis showed a pooled incidence of 22.6% (95% confidence interval 18.5%, 26.7%; I2 = 97%, p < 0.001). The main tools for detection were the Diagnostic Statistical Manual criteria and the Confusion Assessment Methods scale.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence proportion of delirium in older inpatients with cancer is 22.6%. Incidence in the medical setting was higher than in the post-surgical areas. There is a need for high-quality studies examining delirium in older people with cancer.

Risk factors for delirium in advanced cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To systematically collect published research in order to identify and quantify risk factors for delirium in advanced cancer patients.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Proquest, CINAHL, Web of Science, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Chinese Wanfang Data, Chinese Periodical Full-text Database (VIP), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were systematically searched for cohort or case-control studies reporting individual risk factors for delirium among advanced-stage cancer patients published prior to March 2022. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. The pooled adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and its 95% confidence interval were calculated using the RevMan 5.4 software package.

RESULTS

A total of 15 studies with data from 3106 advanced cancer patients were included in our analysis. Nine studies were high-quality and six were of moderate quality. Pooled analyses revealed that 11 risk factors were statistically significant. High-intensity risk factors included sleep disturbance, infection, cachexia and the Palliative Prognostic Index; medium-intensity risk factors included male sex, renal failure, dehydration and drowsiness; low-intensity risk factors included age, total bilirubin and opioid use. Antibiotic use was found to have been a protective factor.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified 12 independent risk factors that were significantly associated with delirium in advanced cancer patients and provide an evidence-based foundation to implement appropriate preventive strategies.

Risk factors for delirium in adult patients receiving specialist palliative care: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Delirium is common and distressing for patients receiving palliative care. Interventions targetting modifiable risk factors in other settings have been shown to prevent delirium. Research on delirium risk factors in palliative care can inform context-specific risk-reduction interventions.

AIM

To investigate risk factors for the development of delirium in adult patients receiving specialist palliative care.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42019157168).

DATA SOURCES

CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, MEDLINE and PsycINFO (1980-2021) were searched for studies reporting the association of risk factors with delirium incidence/prevalence for patients receiving specialist palliative care. Study risk of bias and certainty of evidence for each risk factor were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 28 included studies, 16 conducted only univariate analysis, 12 conducted multivariate analysis. The evidence for delirium risk factors was limited with low to very low certainty.

POTENTIALLY MODIFIABLE RISK FACTORS

Opioids and lower performance status were positively associated with delirium, with some evidence also for dehydration, hypoxaemia, sleep disturbance, liver dysfunction and infection. Mixed, or very limited, evidence was found for some factors targetted in multicomponent prevention interventions: sensory impairments, mobility, catheter use, polypharmacy (single study), pain, constipation, nutrition (mixed evidence).

NON-MODIFIABLE RISK FACTORS

Older age, male sex, primary brain cancer or brain metastases and lung cancer were positively associated with delirium.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings may usefully inform interventions to reduce delirium risk but more high quality prospective cohort studies are required to enable greater certainty about associations of different risk factors with delirium during specialist palliative care.

Factors Influencing Pain Expression in Patients with Cancer: An Expert Opinion

Pain is a multidimensional experience that requires an appropriate assessment, and simple numbering may not be enough for the different components that are involved in the clinical expression. In consideration of the subjectivity of the symptom, each assessment should start from the way in which the patients perceive the pain and from how they deal with it. Some factors related to individual patient characteristics may make pain management difficult because of interference with the clinical pain expression. These factors may amplify the reporting of pain. Cognitive disorders and psychological distress seem to strongly influence pain expression and may render the analgesic treatment more difficult. Aberrant behaviors, such as alcoholism, smoking, and opioid misuse, may play a role, although geographic differences were found in terms of prevalence of the phenomenon, especially in some countries. Finally, the assessment of patients' expectation and the meaning of the personal feeling of changes in pain intensity provide new concepts in pain assessment, which may allow better personalization of the analgesic therapy. A modern pain assessment should include a multitude of factors influencing the phenotype of pain.

Outcome, demography and resource utilization in ICU Patients with delirium and malignancy

Delirium in the general intensive care unit (ICU) population is common, associated with adverse outcomes and well studied. However, knowledge on delirium in the increasing number of ICU patients with malignancy is scarce. The aim was to assess the frequency of delirium and its impact on resource utilizations and outcomes in ICU patients with malignancy. This retrospective, single-center longitudinal cohort study included all patients with malignancy admitted to ICUs of a University Hospital during one year. Delirium was diagnosed by an Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) score ≥ 4. Of 488 ICU patients with malignancy, 176/488 (36%) developed delirium. Delirious patients were older (66 [55-72] vs. 61 [51-69] years, p = 0.001), had higher SAPS II (41 [27-68] vs. 24 [17-32], p < 0.001) and more frequently sepsis (26/176 [15%] vs. 6/312 [1.9%], p < 0.001) and/or shock (30/176 [6.1%] vs. 6/312 [1.9%], p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, delirium was independently associated with lower discharge home (OR [95% CI] 0.37 [0.24-0.57], p < 0.001), longer ICU (HR [95% CI] 0.30 [0.23-0.37], p < 0.001) and hospital length of stay (HR [95% CI] 0.62 [0.50-0.77], p < 0.001), longer mechanical ventilation (HR [95% CI] 0.40 [0.28-0.57], p < 0.001), higher ICU nursing workload (B [95% CI] 1.92 [1.67-2.21], p < 0.001) and ICU (B [95% CI] 2.08 [1.81-2.38], p < 0.001) and total costs (B [95% CI] 1.44 [1.30-1.60], p < 0.001). However, delirium was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality (OR [95% CI] 2.26 [0.93-5.54], p = 0.074). In conclusion, delirium was a frequent complication in ICU patients with malignancy independently associated with high resource utilizations, however, it was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality.

Aberrant opioid use behaviour in advanced cancer

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the presence of aberrant behaviour in a consecutive sample of patients with advanced cancer treated with opioids in a country like Italy, with its peculiar attitudes towards the use opioids. The second objective was to detect the real misuse of opioids in clinical practice.

METHODS

Prospective observational study in two palliative care units in Italy in a period of 6 months. At admission the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale, Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale were measured. For detecting the risk of aberrant opioid use, the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients With Pain (SOAAP), the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT), the Cut Down-Annoyed-Guilty-Eye Opener (CAGE) questionnaire adapted to include drug use (CAGE-AID) were used. Aberrant behaviours displayed at follow-up within 1 month were recorded.

RESULTS

One-hundred and thirteen patients with advanced cancer were examined. About 35% of patients were SOAPP positive. There was correlation between SOAPP, CAGE-AID and ORT. SOAPP was independently associated with a lower Karnofsky level, pain intensity, poor well-being, BPI pain at the moment. No patient displayed aberrant behaviours, despite having a moderate-high risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a high percentage of patients showed a high risk of aberrant behaviours, no patient displayed clinical aberrant behaviours after 1 month-follow-up. This does not exempt from continuous monitoring for patients who are at risk.

Comparison of the prevalence and associated factors of hyperactive delirium in advanced cancer patients between inpatient palliative care and palliative home care

Background

Hyperactive delirium is known to increase family distress and the burden on health care providers. We compared the prevalence and associated factors of agitated delirium in advanced cancer patients between inpatient palliative care and palliative home care on admission and at 3 days before death.

Methods

This was a post hoc exploratory analysis of two multicenter, prospective cohort studies of advanced cancer patients, which were performed at 23 palliative care units (PCUs) between Jan and Dec 2017, and on 45 palliative home care services between July and Dec 2017.

Results

In total, 2998 patients were enrolled and 2829 were analyzed in this study: 1883 patients in PCUs and 947 patients in palliative home care. The prevalence of agitated delirium between PCUs and palliative home care was 5.2% (95% CI: 4.2% ‐ 6.3%) vs. 1.4% (0.7% ‐ 2.3%) on admission (p < 0.001) and 7.6% (6.4% ‐ 8.9%) vs. 5.4% (4.0% ‐ 7.0%) 3 days before death (p < 0.001). However, multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the place of care was not significantly associated with the prevalence of agitated delirium at 3 days before death after adjusting for prognostic factors, physical risk factors, and symptoms.

Conclusions

There was no significant difference in the prevalence of agitated delirium at 3 days before death between inpatient palliative care and palliative home care after adjusting for the patient background, prognostic factors, symptoms, and treatment.

Barriers and Adherence to Pain Management in Advanced Cancer Patients

AIM

To assess patients' barriers to pain management and analgesic medication adherence in patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

This was a prospective cross-sectional study in patients with advanced cancer receiving chronic opioid therapy. Age, gender, cancer diagnosis, Karnofsky level, and educational status were recorded. The Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), Barriers Questionnaire II (BQ-II), Medication Adherence Rating Scale (MARS), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) were the measurement instruments used.

RESULTS

One-hundred-thirteen patients were analyzed. The mean age was 68 (±13) years, and 59 (52%) were male. The mean Karnofsky status was 51.4 (standard deviation [SD] 11.5). The mean score for BQ-II items was 1.77 (SD 0.7). The BQ-II score was independently related to the HADS-Depression score (P = 0.033) and the total HADS score (P = 0.049). Negative side-effects and attitudes toward psychotropic medication globally prevailed among MARS items. These items were independently associated with gender (P = 0.030), pain (P = 0.003), and depression (P = 0.047).

CONCLUSION

Barriers to pain management were mild. Psychological factors such as depression were the main factor associated with barriers. Poor adherence to analgesic medication was mostly manifested as negative side-effects and attitudes toward psychotropic medication, was more frequent observed in females, and was associated with the ESAS items pain and depression.

Death in delirious palliative-care patients occurs irrespective of age: A prospective, observational cohort study of 229 delirious palliative-care patients

Objectives

Patients with terminal illness are at high risk of developing delirium, in particular, those with multiple predisposing and precipitating risk factors. Delirium in palliative care is largely under-researched, and few studies have systematically assessed key aspects of delirium in elderly, palliative-care patients.

Methods

In this prospective, observational cohort study at a tertiary care center, 229 delirious palliative-care patients stratified by age: <65 (N = 105) and ≥65 years (N = 124), were analyzed with logistic regression models to identify associations with respect to predisposing and precipitating factors.

Results

In 88% of the patients, the underlying diagnosis was cancer. Mortality rate and median time to death did not differ significantly between the two age groups. No inter-group differences were detected with respect to gender, care requirements, length of hospital stay, or medical costs. In patients ≥65 years, exclusively predisposing factors were relevant for delirium, including hearing impairment [odds ratio (OR) 3.64; confidence interval (CI) 1.90–6.99; P < 0.001], hypertension (OR 3.57; CI 1.84–6.92; P < 0.001), and chronic kidney disease (OR 4.84; CI 1.19–19.72; P = 0.028). In contrast, in patients <65 years, only precipitating factors were relevant for delirium, including cerebral edema (OR 0.02; CI 0.01–0.43; P = 0.012).

Significance of results

The results of this study demonstrate that death in delirious palliative-care patients occurs irrespective of age. The multifactorial nature and adverse outcomes of delirium across all age in these patients require clinical recognition. Potentially reversible factors should be detected early to prevent or mitigate delirium and its poor survival outcomes.

Predisposing and precipitating risk factors for delirium in palliative care patients

Objective

Delirium is a common complication in palliative care patients, especially in the terminal phase of the illness. To date, evidence regarding risk factors and prognostic outcomes of delirium in this vulnerable population remains sparse.

Method

In this prospective observational cohort study at a tertiary care center, 410 palliative care patients were included. Simple and multiple logistic regression models were used to identify associations between predisposing and precipitating factors and delirium in palliative care patients.

Results

The prevalence of delirium in this palliative care cohort was 55.9% and reached 93% in the terminally ill. Delirium was associated with prolonged hospitalization (p < 0.001), increased care requirements (p < 0.001) and health care costs (p < 0.001), requirement for institutionalization (OR 0.11; CI 0.069–0.171; p < 0.001), and increased mortality (OR 18.29; CI 8.918–37.530; p < 0.001). Predisposing factors for delirium were male gender (OR 2.19; CI 1.251–3.841; p < 0.01), frailty (OR 15.28; CI 5.885–39.665; p < 0.001), hearing (OR 3.52; CI 1.721–7.210; p < 0.001), visual impairment (OR 3.15; CI 1.765–5.607; p < 0.001), and neoplastic brain disease (OR 3.63; CI 1.033–12.771; p < 0.05). Precipitating factors for delirium were acute renal failure (OR 6.79; CI 1.062–43.405; p < 0.05) and pressure sores (OR 3.66; CI 1.102–12.149; p < 0.05).

Significance of results

Our study identified several predisposing and precipitating risk factors for delirium in palliative care patients, some of which can be targeted early and modified to reduce symptom burden.

The incidence and prevalence of delirium across palliative care settings: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a common and distressing neurocognitive condition that frequently affects patients in palliative care settings and is often underdiagnosed.

AIM

Expanding on a 2013 review, this systematic review examines the incidence and prevalence of delirium across all palliative care settings.

DESIGN

This systematic review and meta-analyses were prospectively registered with PROSPERO and included a risk of bias assessment.

DATA SOURCES

Five electronic databases were examined for primary research studies published between 1980 and 2018. Studies on adult, non-intensive care and non-postoperative populations, either receiving or eligible to receive palliative care, underwent dual reviewer screening and data extraction. Studies using standardized delirium diagnostic criteria or valid assessment tools were included.

RESULTS

Following initial screening of 2596 records, and full-text screening of 153 papers, 42 studies were included. Patient populations diagnosed with predominantly cancer (n = 34) and mixed diagnoses (n = 8) were represented. Delirium point prevalence estimates were 4%-12% in the community, 9%-57% across hospital palliative care consultative services, and 6%-74% in inpatient palliative care units. The prevalence of delirium prior to death across all palliative care settings (n = 8) was 42%-88%. Pooled point prevalence on admission to inpatient palliative care units was 35% (confidence interval = 0.29-0.40, n = 14). Only one study had an overall low risk of bias. Varying delirium screening and diagnostic practices were used.

CONCLUSION

Delirium is prevalent across all palliative care settings, with one-third of patients delirious at the time of admission to inpatient palliative care. Study heterogeneity limits meta-analyses and highlights the future need for rigorous studies.

Personalized goal for insomnia and clinical response in advanced cancer patients

AIM

The aim of this study was to assess the Personalized Insomnia Intensity Goal (PIIG), the achievement of Personalized Goal Response (PGR), and Patient Global Impression (PGI) after a comprehensive symptom management.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Advanced cancer patients admitted to palliative care units rated pain and symptoms intensity and their PIIG by using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Score (ESAS) (T0). In patients with significant levels of insomnia, the achievement of target expected (PIIG) was measured (patient goal response, PIGR), as well the patient global impression (PGI), by the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), after a comprehensive symptom management (T7).

RESULTS

Three hundred ninety-seven patients with a level of insomnia of ≥ 3 on ESAS were analyzed in this study. The mean values of PIIG at T0 and T7 were 1.2 (SD 1.5) and 0.9 (SD 1.4), respectively. Most patients (n = 406, 89.8%) indicated a PIIG of ≤ 3 as a target at T0. Such target was significantly lower at T7 (p = < 0.0005). PGI, expressed as MCID, was perceived with a mean decrease in insomnia intensity of - 2.3. In a minority of patients (n = 26; 5.8%) insomnia worsened, with a MCID of 0.50 (SD 2.8). Higher insomnia intensity at T0 and lower insomnia intensity at T7 were independently related to PGI. PIGR was achieved in 87.9% of patients. PIGR was associated with PIIG at T0, and inversely associated to insomnia intensity at T0 and T7, and PIIG at T7.

CONCLUSION

PGIR and PGI seem to be relevant for evaluating the effects of a comprehensive management of insomnia, suggesting therapeutic decisions according to PIIG. Some factors influencing the individual target and clinical response have been detected.

Symptom expression in advanced cancer patients admitted to hospice or home care with and without delirium

The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between delirium and symptom expression in advanced cancer patients admitted to palliative care services. This is a secondary analysis of a consecutive sample of advanced cancer patients who were admitted to home care and hospices, and prospectively assessed for a period of 10 months. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and the MDAS (Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale) were measured at admission (T0) and after seven days of home care or hospice care (T7). Of the eight hundred and forty-eight patients screened in the period, 585 were not considered in the analysis for various reasons. The mean age was 72.1 years (SD 13.7), and 146 patients were males (55.5%). The mean Karnofsky status recorded at T0 is 34.1 (SD = 6.69). The mean duration palliative care assistance is 38.4 days (SD = 48, range 2-220). Of 263 patients who had a MDAS available at T0, 110 patients (41.8%) had a diagnosis of delirium. Of them, 167 patients had complete data regarding MDAS measurement, either at T0 and T7. A larger number of patients (n 167, 63.5%) had delirium after a week of palliative care. Patients with delirium are likely to be older, to have a lower Karnofsky level at T0, and to be home care patients. At T0, weakness, nausea, drowsiness, lack of appetite, and well-being are associated with delirium. At T7, weakness, poor appetite, and poor well-being are significantly associated with delirium. 27% of patients who had a normal cognitive status at T0 developed delirium at T7. In patients with delirium, an improvement in the cognitive status corresponds to a significant improvement in weakness, depression, and appetite. Conversely, the occurrence of delirium in patients who had a normal cognitive status at admission significantly increases the level depression, while the level of weakness and appetite decrease. Symptom expression is amplified in patients with delirium admitted to home care or hospices, while patients without delirium can be more responsive to palliative treatments with a significant decrease in intensity of ESAS items.

The Patient with Difficult Cancer Pain

Most patients with cancer pain can be managed with relatively simple methods using oral analgesics at relatively low doses, even for prolonged periods of time. However, in some clinical conditions pain may be more difficult to manage. Various factors can interfere with a desirable and favorable analgesic response. Data from several studies assessing factors of negative pain prognosis have indicated that neuropathic pain, incident pain, psychological distress, opioid addiction, and baseline pain intensity were associated with more difficult pain control. In this narrative review, the main factors that make the therapeutic response to opioids difficult are examined.

Symptom Expression in Patients with Advanced Cancer Admitted to an Acute Supportive/Palliative Care Unit With and Without Delirium

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between delirium and symptom expression in patients with advanced cancer admitted to an acute supportive/palliative care unit (ASPCU).

METHODS

A consecutive sample of patients with advanced cancer who were admitted to an ASPCU was prospectively assessed for a period of 10 months. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and the MDAS (Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale) were measured at admission (T0) and after 7 days of palliative care (T7).

RESULTS

Two hundred forty-six patients had complete data regarding MDAS measurements, at either T0 and T7. Of these, 75 (30.5%) and 63 patients (25.6%) had delirium at T0 and after a week of palliative care (T7), with a decrease in the frequency of delirium of 4.9% (from 30.5% to 25.6%); that means that 16% of patients with delirium improved their cognitive status after initiation of palliative care. Intensities of pain, depression, poor well-being, and global ESAS were significantly higher in patients with delirium. Patients who did not have delirium at T0 but developed delirium during admission after 1 week of palliative care had a higher level of symptom expression for pain, weakness, nausea, anxiety, dyspnea, appetite, and consequently global ESAS. Patients who did not develop delirium at any time had a relevant decrease in intensity of all ESAS items after 1 week of palliative care. The decrease of symptom intensity was significant for pain, insomnia, appetite, poor well-being, and global ESAS in patients with delirium either at T0 and T7, although these differences were less relevant than those observed in patients without delirium. In patients with delirium at T0 who improved their cognitive function at T7 (no delirium), significant changes were found in most ESAS items.

CONCLUSION

Symptom expression is amplified in patients with delirium, whereas patients without delirium may be more responsive to palliative treatments with a significant decrease in intensity of ESAS items.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Symptom expression is amplified in patients with cancer who have delirium, whereas patients without delirium may be more responsive to palliative treatments with a significant decrease in symptom intensity.

Prevalence of delirium in advanced cancer patients in home care and hospice and outcomes after 1 week of palliative care

AIM

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of delirium in advanced cancer patients admitted to different palliative care services in Italy and possible related factors. The secondary outcome was to assess the changes of delirium after 1 week of palliative care.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of patients was screened for delirium in period of 1 year in seven palliative care services. General data, including primary tumor, age, gender, concomitant disease, palliative prognostic score (PaP), and Karnofsky status, were collected. Possible causes or factors associated with delirium were looked for. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale was used to assess physical and psychological symptoms and the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS) to assess the cognitive status of patients, at admission (T0) and 1 week after palliative care (T7).

RESULTS

Of 848 patients screened, 263 patients were evaluated. Sixty-six patients had only the initial evaluation. The mean Karnofsky status was 34.1 (SD = 6.69); the mean PaP score at admission was 6.9 (SD = 3.97). The mean duration of palliative care assistance, equivalent to survival, was 38.4 days (SD = 48, range 2-220). The mean MDAS values at admission and after 1 week of palliative care were 6.9 (SD = 6.71) and 8.8 (SD = 8.26), respectively. One hundred ten patients (41.8%) and 167 patients (67.3%) had MDAS values ≥ 7 at admission and after 1 week of palliative care, respectively. Age, dehydration, cachexia, chemotherapy in the last three months, and intensity of drowsiness and dyspnea were independently associated with a MDAS > 7. A worsening of drowsiness, the use of opioids, and the use of corticosteroids were independently associated with changes of MDAS from T0 to T7.

CONCLUSION

Although the prevalence of delirium seems to be similar to that reported in other acute settings, delirium tended to worsen or poorly responded to a palliative care treatment. Some clinical factors were independently associated with delirium. This information is relevant for decision-making when delirium does not change despite a traditional intervention. Continuous assessment of delirium should be performed in these settings to detect deterioration of cognitive function. Further studies should elucidate whether an earlier approach to palliative care would decrease the prevalence of delirium at a late stage of disease.