Delirium Assessment Tools Research Articles

Delirium assessment, management and barriers to effective care across Scotland: A secondary analysis of survey data from World Delirium Awareness Day 2023.

Delirium is a common, severe neuropsychiatric syndrome in hospitalised older adults. We evaluated use of validated delirium assessment tools, adherence to national guidelines and prevalence and management of delirium across Scotland, identifying barriers to effective care. Secondary analysis of national survey data, collected by participating clinicians on World Delirium Awareness Day (15 March 2023). Among 120 responses (3,257 patients), the 4AT was the most frequently used assessment tool (75%), while 14% of units reported using clinical judgement alone. The delirium assessment rate was 74%, with a prevalence of 22% at 8 am. Management protocols varied, with frequent routine non-pharmacological interventions including pain management (88%), hydration (87%) and open family visiting (80%). Barriers to delirium care included insufficient staffing and training. While many hospital settings follow national delirium guidelines, some still rely on clinical judgement for assessment, with variability in management protocols and practices. We have highlighted key barriers to effective delirium care in Scotland.

Delirium management and current practice among Intensive Care Units Doctors, Khartoum

Delirium is a brain dysfunction characterized by attention and cognitive disturbances in a fluctuating manner. The international guidelines recommend daily screening for delirium. The Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) and Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) are the most commonly used methods for assessing delirium. This study aimed to identify barriers and gaps in knowledge and practice. This was a hospital-based Cross-Sectional study. Stratified random sampling was used in this study. 72 ICU doctors were randomly selected. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS version 23. Descriptive data were presented, and the chi-squared test was used to determine the associations among variables. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. More than 70% of the doctors were ≤ 30 years of age and female. A total of 69.4% of the participants had < 1year of experience. In total, 94.4% of the participants worked in medical ICUs. Less than 20% of the doctors used delirium assessment tools, with a statistically significant difference based on experience (p=0.012). Delirium was not regularly assessed in 13.9% of the patients. Non-pharmacological management was applied by 76.4% of doctors, and communication with patients was the most frequent (75%). Haloperidol was the most commonly used drug (83.3%). A total of 40.3% of doctors did not stop delirium medication on ICU discharge. A regular delirium assessment was performed. However, the use of validated assessment tools is uncommon. Nonpharmacological management of delirium is important and is mostly performed. Our doctors prescribed antipsychotics for the treatment of both forms of delirium, and almost half of them did not stop the medications on ICU discharge. Medication reconciliation and contact with the next in-charge of the patients are important.

Sleep Hygiene for the Prevention of Hospital Delirium in Neurocritical Care Patients

Background Delirium is a state of altered level of consciousness often leading to confusion, inattention, and changes to levels of cognition. Delirium increases average length of stay in the hospital and costs the US health care system approximately $148 billion each year in associated medical costs. Sleep hygiene is an important factor in delirium prevention for all hospitalized patients. Objectives This quality improvement project was designed to increase implementation of an evidence-based sleep hygiene bundle in the neurocritical care population in order to decrease rates of hospital-acquired delirium. Methods This project followed the Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) framework to facilitate a continuous quality improvement intervention at a mid-Atlantic academic medical center in the neurocritical care population. The continuous quality improvement included the incorporation of “sleep” as a topic into the daily rounding checklist, thus optimizing the ability to improve adherence to a multicomponent sleep hygiene bundle. The intervention includes the preintervention-postintervention occurrences of delirium and use of the daily rounding checklist. Results Nursing adherence to documentation of delirium assessments was high at approximately 99%. Following the intervention, there was a 41% decrease in the number of patients who screened positive for hospital-acquired delirium. Discussion The improvement in cases of hospital-acquired delirium may be attributed to the project intervention. Recommendations for future interventions include analysis of training on sleep plans, focus on nursing education regarding delirium assessment tools, or a measure of staff and/or patient satisfaction related to the intervention.

World delirium awareness and quality survey in 2023-a worldwide point prevalence study.

Delirium, an acute brain dysfunction, is proposed to be highly prevalent in clinical care and shown to significantly increase the risk of mortality and dementia. To report on the global prevalence of clinically documented delirium and delirium-related clinical practices in wards caring for paediatric and adult patients in healthcare facilities. A prospective, cross-sectional, 39-question survey completed on World Delirium Awareness Day, 15 March 2023. Clinicians or researchers with access to clinical data. The primary outcome was the prevalence of clinically documented delirium at 8:00 a.m. (4h) and 8:00 p.m. (±4h). Secondary outcomes included delirium-related care practices and barriers to use. Descriptive statistics were calculated and multilevel modelling was completed. 1664 wards submitted surveys from 44 countries, reporting on delirium assessments at 8:00a.m. (n = 36048) and 8:00p.m. (n = 32867); 61% reported use of validated delirium assessment tools. At 8:00a.m., 18% (n = 2788/15458) and at 8:00p.m., 17.7% (n = 2454/13860) were delirium positive. Top prevention measures were pain management (86.7%), mobilisation (81.4%) and adequate fluids (80.4%). Frequently reported pharmacologic interventions were benzodiazepines (52.7%) and haloperidol (46.2%). Top barriers included the shortage of staff (54.3%), lack of time to educate staff (48.6%) and missing knowledge about delirium (38%). In this study, approximately one out of five patients were reported as delirious. The reported high use of benzodiazepines needs further evaluation as it is not aligned with best-practice recommendations. Findings provide a benchmark for future quality improvement projects and research.

Delirium management and current practice among Intensive Care Units Doctors, Khartoum

Delirium is a brain dysfunction characterized by attention and cognitive disturbances in a fluctuating manner. The international guidelines recommend daily screening for delirium. The Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) and Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) are the most commonly used methods for assessing delirium. This study aimed to identify barriers and gaps in knowledge and practice. This was a hospital-based Cross-Sectional study. Stratified random sampling was used in this study. 72 ICU doctors were randomly selected. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS version 23. Descriptive data were presented, and the chi-squared test was used to determine the associations among variables. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. More than 70% of the doctors were ≤ 30 years of age and female. A total of 69.4% of the participants had < 1year of experience. In total, 94.4% of the participants worked in medical ICUs. Less than 20% of the doctors used delirium assessment tools, with a statistically significant difference based on experience (p=0.012). Delirium was not regularly assessed in 13.9% of the patients. Non-pharmacological management was applied by 76.4% of doctors, and communication with patients was the most frequent (75%). Haloperidol was the most commonly used drug (83.3%). A total of 40.3% of doctors did not stop delirium medication on ICU discharge. A regular delirium assessment was performed. However, the use of validated assessment tools is uncommon. Nonpharmacological management of delirium is important and is mostly performed. Our doctors prescribed antipsychotics for the treatment of both forms of delirium, and almost half of them did not stop the medications on ICU discharge. Medication reconciliation and contact with the next in-charge of the patients are important.

Validating the Fluctuating Mental Status Evaluation in Neurocritically Ill Patients With Acute Stroke.

Neurocritically ill patients are at high risk for developing delirium, which can worsen the long-term outcomes of this vulnerable population. However, existing delirium assessment tools do not account for neurologic deficits that often interfere with conventional testing and are therefore unreliable in neurocritically ill patients. We aimed to determine the accuracy and predictive validity of the Fluctuating Mental Status Evaluation (FMSE), a novel delirium screening tool developed specifically for neurocritically ill patients. Prospective validation study. Neurocritical care unit at an academic medical center. One hundred thirty-nine neurocritically ill stroke patients (mean age, 63.9 [sd, 15.9], median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 11 [interquartile range, 2-17]). None. Expert raters performed daily Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition-based delirium assessments, while paired FMSE assessments were performed by trained clinicians. We analyzed 717 total noncomatose days of paired assessments, of which 52% (n = 373) were rated by experts as days with delirium; 53% of subjects were delirious during one or more days. Compared with expert ratings, the overall accuracy of the FMSE was high (area under the curve [AUC], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.82-0.87). FMSE scores greater than or equal to 1 had 86% sensitivity and 74% specificity on a per-assessment basis, while scores greater than or equal to 2 had 70% sensitivity and 88% specificity. Accuracy remained high in patients with aphasia (FMSE ≥ 1: 82% sensitivity, 64% specificity; FMSE ≥ 2: 64% sensitivity, 84% specificity) and those with decreased arousal (FMSE ≥ 1: 87% sensitivity, 77% specificity; FMSE ≥ 2: 71% sensitivity, 90% specificity). Positive FMSE assessments also had excellent accuracy when predicting functional outcomes at discharge (AUC, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.93]) and 3 months (AUC, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.78-0.92]). In this validation study, we found that the FMSE was an accurate delirium screening tool in neurocritically ill stroke patients. FMSE scores greater than or equal to 1 indicate "possible" delirium and should be used when prioritizing sensitivity, whereas scores greater than or equal to 2 indicate "probable" delirium and should be used when prioritizing specificity.

A world-wide study on delirium assessments and presence of protocols.

Delirium is a common complication of older people in hospitals, rehabilitation and long-term facilities. To assess the worldwide use of validated delirium assessment tools and the presence of delirium management protocols. Secondary analysis of a worldwide one-day point prevalence study on World Delirium Awareness Day, 15 March 2023. Cross-sectional online survey including hospitals, rehabilitation and long-term facilities. Participating clinicians reported data on delirium, the presence of protocols, delirium assessments, delirium-awareness interventions, non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions, and ward/unit-specific barriers. Data from 44 countries, 1664 wards/units and 36048 patients were analysed. Validated delirium assessments were used in 66.7% (n = 1110) of wards/units, 18.6% (n = 310) used personal judgement or no assessment, and 10% (n = 166) used other assessment methods. A delirium management protocol was reported in 66.8% (n = 1094) of wards/units. The presence of protocols for delirium management varied across continents, ranging from 21.6% (on 21/97 wards/units) in Africa to 90.4% (235/260) in Australia, similar to the use of validated delirium assessments with 29.6% (29/98) in Africa to 93.5% (116/124) in North America. Wards/units with a delirium management protocol [n = 1094/1664, 66.8%] were more likely to use a validated delirium test than those without a protocol [odds ratio 6.97 (95% confidence interval 5.289-9.185)]. The presence of a delirium protocol increased the chances for valid delirium assessment and, likely, evidence-based interventions. Wards/units that reported the presence of delirium management protocols had a higher probability of using validated delirium assessments tools to assess for delirium.

Comparison of delirium assessment tools in critically-ill patients: The CAM-ICU versus the Stanford Proxy Test for Delirium (S-PTD). Which one performed best?

Comparison of delirium assessment tools in critically-ill patients: The CAM-ICU versus the Stanford Proxy Test for Delirium (S-PTD). Which one performed best?

Delirium management and current practice among Intensive Care Units Doctors, Khartoum

Delirium is a brain dysfunction characterized by attention and cognitive disturbances in a fluctuating manner. The international guidelines recommend daily screening for delirium. The Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) and Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) are the most commonly used methods for assessing delirium. This study aimed to identify barriers and gaps in knowledge and practice. This was a hospital-based Cross-Sectional study. Stratified random sampling was used in this study. 72 ICU doctors were randomly selected. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS version 23. Descriptive data were presented, and the chi-squared test was used to determine the associations among variables. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. More than 70% of the doctors were ≤ 30 years of age and female. A total of 69.4% of the participants had < 1year of experience. In total, 94.4% of the participants worked in medical ICUs. Less than 20% of the doctors used delirium assessment tools, with a statistically significant difference based on experience (p=0.012). Delirium was not regularly assessed in 13.9% of the patients. Non-pharmacological management was applied by 76.4% of doctors, and communication with patients was the most frequent (75%). Haloperidol was the most commonly used drug (83.3%). A total of 40.3% of doctors did not stop delirium medication on ICU discharge. A regular delirium assessment was performed. However, the use of validated assessment tools is uncommon. Nonpharmacological management of delirium is important and is mostly performed. Our doctors prescribed antipsychotics for the treatment of both forms of delirium, and almost half of them did not stop the medications on ICU discharge. Medication reconciliation and contact with the next in-charge of the patients are important.

Description of an individualised delirium intervention in intensive care units for critically ill patients delivered by an artificial intelligence-assisted system: using the TIDieR checklist.

Delirium is a preventable and reversible complication for intensive care unit (ICU) patients, which can be linked to negative outcomes. Early intervention to cope with the risk factors of delirium is necessary. Yet no specific description of the Artificial Intelligence Assisted Prevention and Management for Delirium (AI-AntiDelirium) following the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist was reported. This is the first study to describe a detailed process for the development of an evidence-based delirium intervention. To describe an individualised delirium intervention which is delivered by an artificial intelligence-assisted system in the ICU for critically ill patients. The TIDieR checklist improved the description of ICU delirium interventions, including several key features for improved implementation of the intervention. This descriptive research describes the AI-assisted ICU delirium interventions for improving cognitive load and adherence of nurses and reducing ICU delirium incidence. Following the TIDieR checklist, we standardised the flow chart of ICU delirium assessment tools; formed an evaluation sheet of ICU delirium risk factors; and translated the evidence-based ABCDEF bundle intervention into practice. Therefore, nurses and researchers would benefit from replicating the interventions for clinical use or experimental research. The TIDieR checklist provided a systematic approach for reporting the complex ICU delirium interventions delivered in a clinical interventional trial, which contributes to the nursing practice policy for the standardisation of interventions.

The Delirium Objective structured clinical examination Education (DOE) Pilot Study: implementation of the delirium OSCE education package within hospital education for registered healthcare professionals.

Objectives To evaluate an interactive delirium educational intervention on confidence and competence in delirium assessment tools and delirium knowledge; delirium knowledge scores; clinical practice; planned practice change and perceived usefulness of the education. Methods We conducted a quasi-experimental pilot study, with qualitative follow-up, at two metropolitan hospital sites in Australia. Participants were active registered healthcare practitioners. Survey data were collected pre (T0) and six weeks after the educational intervention (T1). Scores were derived from the seven-item OSCE marking rubric (maximum 15). At T1, observations of delirium care in practice were undertaken using a 10-item (maximum 12) tool. Results There was a significant increase in perceptions of confidence and competence in using delirium assessment tools and knowledge (p<0.001). Delirium knowledge scores improved significantly from 13.6 (SD 1.7) at baseline to 14.6 (SD 1.1) at T1(p<0.001). The high level of competency in delirium care demonstrated and gained during the OSCE (88.7%, SD 0.1) was translated and maintained into clinical practice (81.5%, SD 0.1) (p=0.07). Open-ended survey responses generated three themes: (1) Assess for Delirium, (2) The usefulness of The Delirium OSCE Package and, (3) A need for ongoing education on delirium care. Conclusion This study generated evidence on integrating The Delirium OSCE Education Package in other clinical settings and private hospital sites. Following this pilot study, a RCT was designed using the tools and methods developed to evaluate the effectiveness of The Delirium OSCE Education Package against conventional professional development education.

A Lethal Combination of Delirium and Overcrowding in the Emergency Department.

Delirium is a common public health concern that significantly impacts older patients admitted to the Emergency Department (ED). This condition is linked to adverse outcomes such as reduced long-term functionality, higher mortality rates, extended hospital stays, and increased medical costs. The identification of risk factors is crucial for the early recognition and management of delirium in ED patients. Aging, cognitive decline, polypharmacy, and sensory impairment are some of the most common general risk factors described in the literature. Although validated delirium assessment tools already exist, they are not practical for the fast-paced ED environment because of their extended evaluation period or specialized training request. Moreover, clear guidance is needed to select the most suitable tool for detecting delirium, balancing between the accuracy and the swiftness required in an overcrowded, high-stress, and understaffed healthcare setting. This narrative review aims to analyze the updated literature on delirium risk factors in older ED patients and focuses on the methods for better screening, managing, and treating this condition in the ED.

Delirium Assessment Treatment Strategies in Critically Ill Pediatric Patients: A Pediatric Pharmacy Association Practice-Based Research Network Survey Study.

The purpose of this study was to describe overall screening, prevention, and treatments for pediatric delirium at various neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), cardiac intensive care units (CICUs), and pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) from the Pediatric Pharmacy Association (PPA) membership. The primary objective was to identify the number of respondents that had a defined delirium-based protocol. The secondary objectives included identification of delirium assessment tools used, first- and second-line delirium treatment options, and monitoring practices for antipsychotics for delirium management. A cross-sectional questionnaire was distributed to PPA members from February 8, 2022, to March, 25, 2022. Comparisons between the NICUs, PICUs, and CICUs were conducted by using chi-square tests, with a priori p value of <0.05. The questionnaire was completed by 84 respondents at 62 institutions; respondents practiced in the PICU or mixed PICU (n = 48; 57.1%), CICU (n = 13; 15.5%), and NICU (n = 23; 27.4%). Sixty-one respondents (72.6%) noted their units routinely screen for delirium, and there was a significant difference between the respondents of different units that use a delirium scoring tool (p < 0.01). Only 33 respondents (39.3%) had a defined delirium protocol, and there was no difference between units (p = 0.31). The most common agents used for delirium treatment were quetiapine and risperidone. There was variability in the monitoring used between respondents, but the majority (n = 74; 88%) monitor electrocardiograms to assess the corrected QT interval, but practice variability existed. Most respondents did not have a defined delirium protocol. Variations were noted in the treatment options and monitoring for critically ill pediatric patients with delirium.

Delirium assessment tools among hospitalized older adults: A systematic review and metaanalysis of diagnostic accuracy.

Delirium is a common neuropsychiatric syndrome that is often overlooked in clinical settings. The most accurate instrument for screening delirium has not been established. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the 4 'A's Test (4AT), Nursing Delirium Screening Scale (Nu-DESC), and Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) in detecting delirium among older adults in clinical settings. These assessment tools feature concise item sets and straightforward administration procedures. Five electronic databases were systematically searched from their inception to September 7, 2022. Studies evaluating the sensitivity and specificity of the 4AT, Nu-DESC, and CAM against the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or International Classification of Diseases as the reference standard were included. Bivariate random effects model was used to summarize the sensitivity and specificity results. A total of 38 studies involving 7378 patients were included. The 4AT, Nu-DESC, and CAM had comparable sensitivity in detecting delirium (0.76, 0.78, and 0.80, respectively). However, the specificity of the CAM was higher than that of the 4AT (0.98 vs 0.89, P=.01) and Nu-DESC 0.99 vs 0.90, P=.003). Diagnostic accuracy was moderated by the percentage of women, acute care setting, sample size, and assessors. The three tools exhibit comparable sensitivity, and the CAM has the highest specificity. Based on the feasibility of the tools, nurses and clinical staffs could employ the Nu-DESC and the 4AT on screening out positive delirium cases and integrate these tools into daily practice. Further investigations are warranted to verify our findings.

4 AT Delirium Assessment Tool in Hospitalized Non-ICU Patients (≥65 Years): A Systematic Review on Validity and Reliability

Background: Delirium is a frequent acute neuropsychiatric illness that affects attention, consciousness, and cognition.&#x0D; Objectives: The 4AT evaluation tool's validity and reliability in hospitalized non-ICU patients over 65 were assessed in this systematic study.&#x0D; Method: PRISMA guidelines and the PICO framework were used, and relevant research papers were found utilizing several databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Sciences, and ScienceDirect). The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to evaluate the study's quality.&#x0D; Results: 257 relevant publications were found, and only ten articles were selected based on inclusion criteria after the screening. Several studies were reported from various regions, including Asia, Europe, Canada, and Australia. Furthermore, studies found varying prevalence levels for 4AT and control groups, with the greatest for the 4AT group being 40.32%. Moreover, most research employed DSM-5 criteria, while some relied on CAM, DSM-4, and Psychiatric examination by qualified clinicians. Meanwhile, the sensitivity varied from 70% to 100%, and the specificity ranged from 71.6% to 99.2%. In contrast, other assessment tools, such as CAM and OBS, also demonstrated sensitivity and specificity. The main advantage was the time to complete the 4AT tool, which required 2-3 minutes, whereas the other tools took 3.6 and 12.46 minutes, respectively. The 4AT tool was a rapid, validated, easy patient assessment tool. In addition, it was found to improve delirium diagnosis.&#x0D; Conclusion: The tool has been found to have good sensitivity and specificity, and it may be completed quickly by non-specialists.

Survey of Guideline Compliance and Attitude Toward Symptom Management in Japanese Intensive Care Units.

The Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium in Adult Patients in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) was revised in 2018 to include sleep disruption and immobility. Inadequate management of these symptoms can lead to negative consequences. A 2019 survey in Japan found that the guideline was recognized but needed to be consistently implemented. This study aimed to examine compliance with the guideline for symptom management of pain, agitation, delirium, and sleep in Japanese ICUs. This study included all ICUs in Japan and asked one representative from each unit to respond to the web survey from January 2022 to February 2022. Of a potential 643 units, 125 respondents from the ICU were included in the analysis (19.4% response rate). Compared to the guideline's recommendations, (a) pain assessment was performed in 86.3% of patients who could self-report, and in 72.0% of those who could not self-report; (b) agitation and sedation assessment was performed in 99% of patients; (c) only 66.1% of nurses reported assessing sleep quality on the units, and 9.1% performed the subjective sleep quality assessment; (d) the use of the recommended risk factor of the delirium assessment tool was low (9.6%). Additionally, according to the survey respondents, contrary to the guideline, many units administered medications to prevent and treat delirium, and approximately 30% used multiple non-drug interventions. The data are expressed as numbers and percentages. Some datasets were incomplete due to missing values. Most units used drugs for delirium prevention and treatment, and only a few used non-drug interventions. There is a need to popularize the assessment of sleep and delirium risk factors and use non-drug interventions to promote patient-centered care in the future.

Pediatric delirium is associated with increased brain injury marker levels in cardiac surgery patients

Despite global consensus on the importance of screening pediatric delirium, correlations between pediatric delirium during acute brain injury and adult delirium are unclear. Therefore, we hypothesized that similar pediatric biomarkers reflect acute brain injury as in adult delirium. We observed pediatric cardiac surgery patients from neonatal age to 18 years, who were admitted to our pediatric intensive care unit after cardiovascular operations between October 2019 to June 2020, up to post-operative day 3 (4 days total). We recorded age, sex, risk score (Risk Adjustment in Congenital Heart Surgery [RACHS-1]), midazolam/dexmedetomidine/fentanyl dosage, and pediatric Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (pSOFA). Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS), Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium (CAPD), Face, Leg, Activity, Consolability (FLACC) behavioral scale, and Withdrawal Assessment Tool (WAT-1) scales were used and serum sampling for neuron specific enolase (NSE) was conducted. Consciousness status was considered hierarchical (coma > delirium > normal) and associations between conscious status and NSE were conducted by hierarchical Bayesian modeling. We analyzed 134 data points from 40 patients (median age 12 months). In the multi-regression model, NSE was positively associated with coma [posterior odds ratio (OR) = 1.1, 95% credible interval (CrI) 1.01–1.19] while pSOFA [posterior OR = 1.63, 95% CrI 1.17–2.5], midazolam [posterior OR = 1.02, 95% CrI 1.01–1.04], and dexmedetomidine [posterior OR = 9.52, 95% CrI 1.02–108.85] were also associated. We also evaluated consciousness state probability at each NSE concentration and confirmed both that consciousness was hierarchically sorted and CAPD scores were also associated with NSE [posterior OR = 1.32, 95% CrI 1.09–1.58]. “Eye contact” (r = 0.55) was the most correlated component with NSE within the pain, withdrawal syndrome, and PD items. PD within the hierarchy of consciousness (coma, delirium, normal) and CAPD scores are associated with brain injury marker levels. Using pediatric delirium assessment tools for monitoring brain injury, especially eye contact, is a reliable method for observing PD.

Research progress on risk factors of delirium in burn patients: A narrative review.

Delirium, an acute brain dysfunction, is a common and serious complication in burn patients. The occurrence of delirium increases the difficulty of patient treatment, is associated with various adverse outcomes, and increases the burden on the patient's family. Many scholars have studied the factors that cause delirium, but the causes, pathogenesis, and treatment of delirium in burn patients have not been fully revealed. There is no effective pharmacological treatment for delirium, but active preventive measures can effectively reduce the incidence of delirium in burn patients. Therefore, it is necessary to study the relevant factors affecting the occurrence of delirium in burn patients. This study was conducted on December 20, 2021 by searching the PubMed database for a narrative review of published studies. The search strategy included keywords related to "burns," "delirium," and "risk factors." We reviewed the characteristics of delirium occurrence in burn patients and various delirium assessment tools, and summarized the risk factors for the development of delirium in burn patients in terms of personal, clinical, and environmental factors, and we found that although many risk factors act on the development of delirium in burn patients, some of them, such as clinical and environmental factors, are modifiable, suggesting that we can estimate the exposure of burn patients to risk factors by assessing their likelihood of delirium occurring and to make targeted interventions that provide a theoretical basis for the prevention and treatment of burn delirium.

Needs assessment survey of healthcare providers' perceptions and practices regarding delirium prevention at a university medical center.

Background: Despite the high prevalence and serious implications of delirium, identification, tracking, and documentation of the condition remain a challenge for the health care team, impeding management of patients. This survey is the first phase of a qualitative study to build a conversational agent-based tool for screening and managing delirium-prone patients. Objectives: To assess healthcare providers’ perceptions of delirium management, focusing on patient assessment, therapeutic interventions, and subsequent communication and documentation. Design: An electronic web-based survey was distributed to healthcare providers identified as caring for inpatient acutely ill older adults admitted for medical and orthopedic surgery needs. Respondent contact information was removed to preserve anonymity. Setting: A 1,000 bed university-affiliated teaching hospital in an urban setting. Participants: 23 residents in family practice, 36 residents in internal medicine, and a total of 492 advanced care nurses, nurses, and clinical staff. Approach: The analysis of survey responses provided insight into providers’ current experiences with delirium assessment tools including computerized documentation, as well as their perceptions and attitudes toward delirium prevention. Key results: Most respondents (89%) thought delirium could be prevented, and 85% thought targeting delirium risk factors was helpful. Fifty one percent reported patients’ loneliness and need for companionship, and 65% believed delirium was linked to higher mortality. Only 14% of respondents thought existing Electronic Health Record (EHR) alerts to identify high-risk delirium patients were useful, and 38% thought current delirium assessment protocols were helpful. In addition, 33% of nurses never received formal delirium prevention training, and 48% indicated that they needed improved systems to assess and manage patients at risk for delirium. Conclusion: A majority of providers affirmed that current delirium protocols are helpful; however, existing screening instruments and methods for documentation are cumbersome, resulting in incomplete or limited documentation of episodes. These barriers lead to an understatement of evidence available for continuous improvement of the patient management process.

Self-efficacy of caring for patients in the intensive care unit with delirium: Development and validation of a scale for intensive care unit nurses

BackgroundImproving the self-efficacy of intensive care unit nurses for delirium care could help them adapt to the changing situation of delirium patients. Validated measures of nurses' self-efficacy of delirium care are lacking ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to develop a Delirium Care Self-Efficacy Scale for assessing nurses' confidence about caring for patients in the intensive care unit and to examine the scale's psychometric properties. MethodsDraft scale items were generated from a review of relevant literature and face-to-face interviews with intensive care unit nurses; content validity was conducted with a panel of five experts in delirium. A group of nurses were recruited by convenience sampling from intensive care units (N = 299) for item analysis of the questionnaire, assessment of validity, and reliability of the scale. Nurse participants were recruited from nine adult critical care units affiliated with a hospital in Taiwan. Data were collected from August 2020 to July 2021. ResultsContent validity index was 0.98 for the initial 26 items, indicating good validity. The critical ratio for item discrimination was 14.47–19.29, and item-to-total correlations ranged from 0.67 to 0.81. Principal component analysis reduced items to 13 and extracted two factors, confidence in delirium assessment and confidence in delirium management, which explained 66.82% of the total variance. Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency was 0.94 with good test–retest reliability (r = 0.92). High scale scores among participants were significantly associated with age (≥40 years), work experience in an intensive care unit (≥10 years), delirium education, and willingness to use delirium assessment tools. ConclusionsThe newly developed Delirium Care Self-Efficacy Scale demonstrated acceptable reliability and validity as a measure of confidence for intensive care nurses caring for and managing patients with delirium in the intensive care unit.