Heterogeneity in design and analysis of ICU delirium randomized trials: a systematic review

Assessment of level of knowledge, attitude, and associated factors toward delirium among health professionals working in intensive care unit multicenter, cross-sectional study, Amhara region comprehensive specialized hospitals, Northwest Ethiopia, 2023

Background

Patients in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) are at high risk of developing delirium. Lack of early detection and the inability to provide prompt management of delirium remain challenges of ICU patient care. This study aimed to assess the level of knowledge, attitude, and associated factors toward delirium among healthcare providers working in ICU.

Methods

A multicenter, cross-sectional survey was conducted in comprehensive specialized hospitals from 15 April to 5 June 2023. Data were collected using a pretested, self-administered questionnaire. Ordinal logistic regression analysis was performed at p < 0.05 with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The odds ratio with 95% CI was calculated to determine the strength of the association between independent and outcome variables.

Results

A total of 202 health professionals were included in this study, with a response rate of 87%. The proportions of good, moderate, and poor knowledge about delirium in ICU were 29.21 (95% CI: 23-36), 52.48 (95% CI: 45.3-59.5) and 18.32 (95% CI:13.2-24.4), respectively. The overall proportion of negative, neutral and positive attitude were 13.9 (95% CI: 9.4-19.4), 65.8 (95% CI: 58.9-72.4) and 20.3 (95% CI: 15-26.5) respectively. Being an anesthetist and exposure to training were positively associated with a good knowledge while belief in screening tool to change care and reading, and using guidelines were positively associated with a positive attitude. However, believing the impossibility of changing the practice of delirium care, and negative attitudes were delaying factors for a good knowledge. Also, workload and poor knowledge were hindering factors for a positive attitude.

Conclusion

More than half of health professionals had moderate knowledge and neutral attitude toward delirium. However, some of them had poor knowledge and a negative attitude. We recommend stakeholders prepare regular training for delirium care. Also, we urge health professionals to update themselves by reading guidelines and to use screening protocols for delirium.

Heterogeneity in the definition of delirium in ICUs and association with the intervention effect in randomized controlled trials: a meta-epidemiological study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the heterogeneity in the definition of delirium in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in meta-analyses of delirium in intensive care units (ICUs) and to explore whether intervention effect depends on the definition used.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for meta-analyses including RCTs evaluating prevention or treatment strategies of delirium in ICU. The definition of delirium was collected from RCTs and classified as validated (DSM criteria, CAM-ICU, ICDSC, NEECHAM, DRS-R98) or non-validated (non-validated scales, set of symptoms, physician appreciation or not reported). We conducted a meta-epidemiological analysis to compare intervention effects between trials using or not a validated definition by a two-step method as primary analysis and a multilevel model as secondary analysis. A ratio of odds ratios (ROR) < 1 indicated larger intervention effects in trials using a non-validated definition.

RESULTS

Of 149 RCTs (41 meta-analyses), 109 (73.1%) used a validated definition and 40 (26.8%) did not (including 31 [20.8%] not reporting the definition). The primary analysis of 7 meta-analyses (30 RCTs) found no significant difference in intervention effects between trials using a validated definition and the others (ROR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.27-1.08), whereas the secondary multilevel analysis including 12 meta-analyses (67 RCTs) found significantly larger effects for trials using a non-validated versus a validated definition (ROR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.21-0.62).

CONCLUSION

The definition of delirium was heterogeneous across RCTs, with one-fifth not reporting how they evaluated delirium. We did not find a significant association with intervention effect in the primary analysis. The secondary analysis including more studies revealed significantly larger intervention effects in trials using a non-validated versus a validated definition.

Timing errors and temporal uncertainty in clinical databases-A narrative review

A firm concept of time is essential for establishing causality in a clinical setting. Review of critical incidents and generation of study hypotheses require a robust understanding of the sequence of events but conducting such work can be problematic when timestamps are recorded by independent and unsynchronized clocks. Most clinical models implicitly assume that timestamps have been measured accurately and precisely, but this custom will need to be re-evaluated if our algorithms and models are to make meaningful use of higher frequency physiological data sources. In this narrative review we explore factors that can result in timestamps being erroneously recorded in a clinical setting, with particular focus on systems that may be present in a critical care unit. We discuss how clocks, medical devices, data storage systems, algorithmic effects, human factors, and other external systems may affect the accuracy and precision of recorded timestamps. The concept of temporal uncertainty is introduced, and a holistic approach to timing accuracy, precision, and uncertainty is proposed. This quantitative approach to modeling temporal uncertainty provides a basis to achieve enhanced model generalizability and improved analytical outcomes.

Melatonin and melatonin-receptor agonists to prevent delirium in hospitalized older adults: An umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Alterations in circadian rhythm play an important role in the development of delirium. In this umbrella review, we examined the efficacy of melatonin and ramelteon for delirium prevention in hospitalized older adults.

METHODS

Umbrella review methodology from the Joanna Briggs Institute guided the review process. Only meta-analyses were included. Risk of bias was evaluated using the AMSTAR-2 checklist.

RESULTS

Three meta-analyses were included in this review. The quality of studies was low-to-moderate. Two meta-analyses reported a significant reduction in delirium using melatonin or ramelteon (pooled OR and 95% confidence intervals ranged from 0.41 [0.19-0.86] to 0.63 [0.46-0.87]). Melatonergics significantly reduced delirium on medical units (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.07-0.88) but not surgical units (OR = 0.62, 0.16-2.43). Heterogenity was high, with I² ranging from 72.14% to 84%.

CONCLUSIONS

Melatonergics appear to prevent delirium among hospitalized older adults, particularly those on medical units. Based on these results, providers may consider using melatonergics as complements to high-quality multicomponent delirium prevention.