An integrative literature review exploring the clinical management of delirium in patients with advanced cancer

Physicians' Beliefs and Attitudes Toward Hypoactive Delirium in The Last Days of Life

CONTEXT

The perspective toward hypoactive delirium in the last days of life could be different among physicians.

OBJECTIVES

To clarify the attitudes, beliefs, and opinions of palliative care physicians and liaison psychiatrists toward hypoactive delirium in the last days of life and to explore the association among these factors.

METHODS

A nationwide cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted among 1667 physicians who were either certified palliative care specialists or liaison psychiatrists. Physicians' agreement with the appropriateness of pharmacological management (e.g., antipsychotics) (one item), their beliefs (11 items), and their opinions (four items) were measured.

RESULTS

787 (47%) physicians responded. 481 (62%) agreed to use of medications for hypoactive delirium in the last days of life, whereas 296 (38.1%) disagreed. More than 95% agreed with "hypoactive delirium at the end of life can be considered as a part of natural dying process." Multivariate analysis identified two belief subscales of "hypoactive delirium at the end of life is a natural dying process" and "antipsychotics are futile and harmful in managing hypoactive delirium" had a significant negative correlation with the use of medications. On the other hand, one belief subscale of "hypoactive delirium can be distressing even if patients' consciousness is impaired" had significant positive correlations with the use of medications.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacological management of hypoactive delirium in the last days of life differs depending on physicians' beliefs. Future research is needed to clarify the efficacy and safety of pharmacological management of hypoactive delirium.

Terminal Delirium in Hospice: The Experiences and Perspectives of Caregivers Providing Care to Terminally Ill Patients in Home Settings

OBJECTIVES

Little is known about the experiences of caregivers who provide care to persons with terminal delirium (TD) in home settings. This scarcity of information is suggestive that further research is needed about care for hospice patients with delirium in the home and community.

AIM

To elicit views, feelings, and end-of-life care experiences of primary caregivers assisting dying persons with TD in hospice at home.

DESIGN

Qualitative, exploratory, cross-sectional study design was chosen. In-depth semistructured interviews explored caregiver experiences in caring for persons with TD. Qualitative thematic framework analysis was used.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifteen bereaved adult primary caregivers who received services from a hospice care program affiliated with a large nonprofit health system in the US Midwest.

RESULTS

Caregiver experiences were broad and reflected 4 major themes: symptomology, coping, effective and noneffective interventions, and support. The most distressing factors for caregivers were behaviors and symptomology of TD. They did not know what to say, how to respond, and how best to behave with someone who had delirium. Many caregivers had the impression that medication does not lessen delirium symptoms and that nonpharmacologic interventions are effective and beneficial only when they were important and meaningful to patients before delirium onset.

CONCLUSIONS

This study added new knowledge from direct and personal perspectives of caregivers providing end-of-life care to patients at home. Understanding developed about provision of care to someone with TD in home hospice. Improved comprehension of caregiver experiences can help professional hospice and palliative care staff better prepare caregivers for when patients have TD.

Drug therapy for delirium in terminally ill adults

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a syndrome characterised by an acute disturbance of attention and awareness which develops over a short time period and fluctuates in severity over the course of the day. It is commonly experienced during inpatient admission in the terminal phase of illness. It can cause symptoms such as agitation and hallucinations and is distressing for terminally ill people, their families and staff. Delirium may arise from any number of causes and treatment should aim to address these causes. When this is not possible, or treatment is unsuccessful, drug therapy to manage the symptoms may become necessary. This is the second update of the review first published in 2004.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of drug therapies to manage delirium symptoms in terminally ill adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to July 2019, reference lists of retrieved papers, and online trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of drug therapies in any dose by any route, compared to another drug therapy, a non-pharmacological approach, placebo, standard care or wait-list control, for the management of delirium symptoms in terminally ill adults (18 years or older).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently screened citations, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Primary outcomes were delirium symptoms; agitation score; adverse events. Secondary outcomes were: use of rescue medication; cognitive status; survival. We applied the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence for each outcome and we include eight 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies (three new to this update), with 399 participants. Most participants had advanced cancer or advanced AIDS, and mild- to moderate-severity delirium. Meta-analysis was not possible because no two studies examined the same comparison. Each study was at high risk of bias for at least one criterion. Most evidence was low to very low quality, downgraded due to very serious study limitations, imprecision or because there were so few data. Most studies reported delirium symptoms; two reported agitation scores; three reported adverse events with data on extrapyramidal effects; and none reported serious adverse events. 1. Haloperidol versus placebo There may be little to no difference between placebo and haloperidol in delirium symptoms within 24 hours (mean difference (MD) 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.07 to 0.75; 133 participants). Haloperidol may slightly worsen delirium symptoms compared with placebo at 48 hours (MD 0.49, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.88; 123 participants with mild- to moderate-severity delirium). Haloperidol may reduce agitation slightly compared with placebo between 24 and 48 hours (MD -0.14, 95% -0.28 to -0.00; 123 participants with mild- to moderate-severity delirium). Haloperidol probably increases extrapyramidal adverse effects compared with placebo (MD 0.79, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.41; 123 participants with mild- to moderate-severity delirium). 2. Haloperidol versus risperidone There may be little to no difference in delirium symptoms with haloperidol compared with risperidone within 24 hours (MD -0.42, 95% CI -0.90 to 0.06; 126 participants) or 48 hours (MD -0.36, 95% CI -0.92 to 0.20; 106 participants with mild- to moderate-severity delirium). Agitation scores and adverse events were not reported for this comparison. 3. Haloperidol versus olanzapine We are uncertain whether haloperidol reduces delirium symptoms compared with olanzapine within 24 hours (MD 2.36, 95% CI -0.75 to 5.47; 28 participants) or 48 hours (MD 1.90, 95% CI -1.50 to 5.30, 24 participants). Agitation scores and adverse events were not reported for this comparison. 4. Risperidone versus placebo Risperidone may slightly worsen delirium symptoms compared with placebo within 24 hours (MD 0.76, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.22; 129 participants); and at 48 hours (MD 0.85, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.38; 111 participants with mild- to moderate-severity delirium). There may be little to no difference in agitation with risperidone compared with placebo between 24 and 48 hours (MD -0.05, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.09; 111 participants with mild- to moderate-severity delirium). Risperidone may increase extrapyramidal adverse effects compared with placebo (MD 0.73 95% CI 0.09 to 1.37; 111 participants with mild- to moderate-severity delirium). 5. Lorazepam plus haloperidol versus placebo plus haloperidol We are uncertain whether lorazepam plus haloperidol compared with placebo plus haloperidol improves delirium symptoms within 24 hours (MD 2.10, 95% CI -1.00 to 5.20; 50 participants with moderate to severe delirium), reduces agitation within 24 hours (MD 1.90, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.80; 52 participants), or increases adverse events (RR 0.70, 95% CI -0.19 to 2.63; 31 participants with moderate to severe delirium). 6. Haloperidol versus chlorpromazine We are uncertain whether haloperidol reduces delirium symptoms compared with chlorpromazine at 48 hours (MD 0.37, 95% CI -4.58 to 5.32; 24 participants). Agitation scores were not reported. We are uncertain whether haloperidol increases adverse events compared with chlorpromazine (MD 0.46, 95% CI -4.22 to 5.14; 24 participants). 7. Haloperidol versus lorazepam We are uncertain whether haloperidol reduces delirium symptoms compared with lorazepam at 48 hours (MD -4.88, 95% CI -9.70 to 0.06; 17 participants). Agitation scores were not reported. We are uncertain whether haloperidol increases adverse events compared with lorazepam (MD -6.66, 95% CI -14.85 to 1.53; 17 participants). 8. Lorazepam versus chlorpromazine We are uncertain whether lorazepam reduces delirium symptoms compared with chlorpromazine at 48 hours (MD 5.25, 95% CI 0.38 to 10.12; 19 participants), or increases adverse events (MD 7.12, 95% CI 1.08 to 15.32; 18 participants). Agitation scores were not reported.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

use of rescue medication, cognitive impairment, survival There were insufficient data to draw conclusions or assess GRADE.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no high-quality evidence to support or refute the use of drug therapy for delirium symptoms in terminally ill adults. We found low-quality evidence that risperidone or haloperidol may slightly worsen delirium symptoms of mild to moderate severity for terminally ill people compared with placebo. We found moderate- to low-quality evidence that haloperidol and risperidone may slightly increase extrapyramidal adverse events for people with mild- to moderate-severity delirium. Given the small number of studies and participants on which current evidence is based, further research is essential.

Use of psychotropic medication in women with psychotic disorders at menopause and beyond

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Drugs have been extensively prescribed for the treatment of psychotic symptoms in schizophrenia and related disorders, as well as for the management of psychotic features in delirium, dementia and affective disorders. The aim of this narrative review is to focus on the recent literature on drug treatment in women with psychosis at the transition to menopause and subsequently.

RECENT FINDINGS

The recent literature emphasizes the following points: the efficacy of antipsychotic medication in psychosis is largely confined to the alleviation of delusions and hallucinations; menopause and ageing alter the kinetics and dynamics of drug action; drugs other than antipsychotics are currently being tested to address the cognitive, affective and negative symptoms of psychotic illnesses; menopausal symptoms add to comorbidities and require simultaneous treatment, raising the probability of deleterious drug interactions; antipsychotic drugs have many side effects and contribute to high mortality rates in the older psychosis population.

SUMMARY

A major implication for research is that antipsychotic drugs with a wider range of action and with fewer side effects are urgently needed. The clinical implications of the pharmacotherapy of psychotic illness are: older women's needs must be assessed through a comprehensive history and review of systems and physical and mental examination. To avoid adverse effects, drug dosages are best kept low and polypharmacy avoided wherever possible. It is important to frequently reassess older patients, as their pharmacotherapy requirements change with age and with comorbidity.