Delirium In Palliative Care Patients Research Articles

Early Diagnosis of Delirium in Palliative Care Patients Decreases Mortality and Necessity of Palliative Sedation: Results of a Prospective Observational Study.

Introduction: Delirium in end-of-life patients is reported to be between 13% and 42% and up to 80% in the terminal phase. It is a serious clinical situation, often a cause of death due to the frequent ineffectiveness of treatments. This study aimed to assess whether and how much precocity of diagnosis, hitherto little considered, could affect the outcomes and prognosis of delirium in palliative care settings.Methods: Patients consecutively admitted to a palliative care unit (PCU) between October 2018 and December 2019, cared for both in hospice and home programs, were analyzed. All patients were subjected to a careful procedure aimed at recognizing the onset of delirium. The first step was the detection of prodromal "sentinel" symptoms related to incoming delirium. PCU staff and family members/caregivers were trained to observe the patients and immediately identify the appearance of even one symptom. The final diagnosis was performed with the 4AT (4 A’s test). Patients were then included in the categories of "early" or "slow" diagnosis (cut-off: four hours) depending on the time between sentinel symptom observation and the final diagnosis of delirium.Results: Among 503 admitted patients, 95 developed delirium. Confusion was the most frequent sentinel symptom (49.5%). The early diagnosis was more frequent in hospice than in home care (p-value<0.0001). Delirium was positively resolved in 43 patients, of which 25 with an early diagnosis (p-value=0.038). Time to resolution was shorter in the case of early diagnosis (7.1 vs. 13.7 hours in hospice patients; p-value=0.018). Palliative sedation was performed on 25 patients, but only 8 of them had an early diagnosis.Conclusion: Time of diagnosis was important in determining the clinical outcomes of patients in charge of PCU who experienced delirium. The early diagnosis reduced both mortality and the necessity of palliative sedation.

The prevalence, associated factors, clinical impact, and state of diagnosis of delirium in palliative care patients

PurposeThe aim of this study is to establish the prevalence, associated factors, and clinical impact of delirium in newly referred palliative care patients and the percentage of delirium diagnoses missed by primary medical teams.MethodsNewly referred palliative care patients were evaluated and were reviewed for possible associated factors of delirium. Univariable and multivariable analysis were used to identify associated factors. Median overall survival and survival curves were analyzed. The percentage of missed diagnosis in IPD patients was identified.ResultsWe included 350 palliative care patients. Nearly all patients had cancer diagnosis (96.6%). The overall prevalence of delirium was 44.0%. The independent associated factors of delirium were age ≥ 63 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 7.0; 95% CI, 2.2–22.9), palliative performance scale ≤ 20% (aOR, 54.5; 95% CI, 13.1–228.0), brain metastasis (aOR, 15.6; 95% CI, 3.7–66.7), urinary tract infection (aOR, 18.8; 95% CI, 4.7–75.5), sepsis (aOR, 59.0; 95% CI, 4.4–797.8), hyponatremia (aOR, 8.8; 95% CI, 2.6–29.8), and hypercalcemia (not applicable). Interestingly, opioids and benzodiazepines were not associated with delirium. Delirious patients had significantly shorter survival (median survival 11 days). Delirium diagnoses were missed for 76.1%.ConclusionNearly half of the palliative care patients had delirium, which was associated with noticeably short survivals. We identified the independent factors associated with the delirium. Despite having a remarkably high prevalence rate and being a well-known poor prognostic factor, there was still a very high rate of missed delirium diagnoses. Effective, routine, delirium screening of palliative care patients needs to be emphasized.

Refractory delirium in palliative care sitting

This paper describes the management of a 65 years old male patienttransferred to the palliative care ward from the Intensive Care Unit, withbrain metastasis and infarction admission, epilepsy, neurological dysfunction,cognitive impairment and a history of previous delirium episodes. Wediscuss four delirium assessment methods and possible collaborativemultidisciplinary approaches to manage persistent delirium in palliative carepatients.1.Agar M, Alici Y, and Breitbart (2015)W.17.5 Delirium. In In Oxford Textbookof Palliative Medicine 5th edition. Cherny N, Fallon M, Kaasa S, Portenoy R, Currow D. Oxford University Press . pp 1092-11002.Hosker CM and Bennet MI. Delirium andagitation at the end of life. BMJ2016;353:i3085 doi: 10.1136/bmj.i30853.Cherny N, Fallon M, Kaasa S, PortenoyR, Currow D. Oxford Textbook of Palliative Medicine 5th edition. Oxford.Oxford University Press. 20154.Ryan K, Leonard M, Guerin S, et al.Validation of the confusion assessmentmethod in the palliative care setting.Palliat Med 2009;23(1):40-55.Wong CL, Holroyd-Leduc J, Simel DL,et al. Does this patient have delirium?:

Evaluating the effects of the pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions to manage delirium symptoms in palliative care patients: systematic review

There is a high prevalence of delirium in palliative care patients. This review aims to evaluate the effects of the pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions used to manage delirium symptoms in this patient group. A recent study has suggested there is no role for antipsychotic medication in the management of delirium in palliative care patients, which is a move away from previous expert opinion. In addition, recent findings suggest there may be a role for the use of antipsychotics in combination with benzodiazepines in the management of agitated delirium. It is too early to abandon the use of antipsychotic medication entirely in the management of delirium, however there remains inadequate evidence to support the routine use of either pharmacological or nonpharmacological interventions for delirium treatment. Clinicians should determine the delirium subtype and severity, using this to inform the most appropriate pharmacological treatment if required. Further rigorously designed research is needed to seek clarity over whether the alleviation of symptoms is dose dependent, and to determine whether there is a severity threshold over which pharmacological interventions are most effective. Future research is required to evaluate nonpharmacological interventions in this population.

Predisposing and precipitating risk factors for delirium in palliative care patients.

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. 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. 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). 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.

Validity and Reliability of the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale-Thai Version (MDAS-T) for Assessment of Delirium in Palliative Care Patients

BackgroundDelirium, a neuropsychiatric syndrome that occurs throughout medical illness trajectories, is frequently misdiagnosed. The Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS) is a commonly used tool in palliative care (PC) settings. Our objective was to establish and validate the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale‐Thai version (MDAS‐T) in PC patients.Materials and MethodsThe MDAS was translated into Thai. Content validity, inter‐rater reliability, and internal consistency were explored. The construct validity of the MDAS‐T was analyzed using exploratory factor analysis. Instrument testing of the MDAS‐T, the Thai version of the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM‐ICU‐T), and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition as the gold standard was performed. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the optimal cutoff score. The duration of each assessment was recorded.ResultsThe study enrolled 194 patients. The content validity index was 0.97. The intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach's α coefficient were 0.98 and 0.96, respectively. A principal component analysis indicated a homogeneous, one‐factor structure. The area under the ROC curve was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93–0.99). The best combination of sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) of the MDAS‐T were 0.92 (0.85–0.96) and 0.90 (0.82–0.94), respectively, with a cutoff score of 9, whereas the CAM‐ICU‐T yielded 0.58 (0.48–0.67) and 0.98 (0.93–0.99), respectively. The median MDAS‐T assessment time was 5 minutes.ConclusionThis study established and validated the MDAS‐T as a good and feasible tool for delirium screening and severity rating in PC settings.Implications for PracticeDelirium is prevalent in palliative care (PC) settings and causes distress to patients and families, thereby making delirium screening necessary. This study found that the MDAS‐T is a highly objective and feasible test for delirium screening and severity monitoring in PC settings and can greatly improve the quality of care for this population.

Antipsychotics Don't Help with Delirium in Palliative Care Patients

Antipsychotics often are used to manage delirium in palliative care patients, despite the lack of clinical evidence to support this practice. This

The Impact of Plasma Cholinergic Enzyme Activity and Other Risk Factors for the Development of Delirium in Patients Receiving Palliative Care

ContextDelirium is an important complication in palliative care patients. One of the potential risk factors for cognitive disorders is deterioration in cholinergic neurotransmission. Anticholinergic medications are known to be important owing to the association of their metabolites with significant morbidity, which is often the result of cumulative effects of medications (anticholinergic burden). Additionally, cholinergic enzymes are possible candidates reflecting the cholinergic situation in patients. However, the role of cholinesterases (CHE) for delirium in palliative care patients is unknown. ObjectivesFollowing local Ethics Board approval and written informed consent, we recruited a cohort of patients who had been admitted to the Heidelberg University Palliative Care Unit related to CHE and other factors at risk for delirium. MethodsDelirium was assessed using the Nursing Delirium Screening Scale once daily in all cancer patients (N = 100) during their stay on the palliative care unit. In a subgroup of 69 probes, blood samples were analyzed for acetyl- and butyrylcholinesterase activity spectrophotometrically. Furthermore, patients’ medications were recorded. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate potential predictors of delirium. ResultsDelirium was identified in 29% of patients. Karnofsky Performance Status Scale score was significantly lower (P = 0.021) and mortality higher (P = 0.018) in patients with delirium. Plasma CHE activity was not associated with delirium. However, a significant effect of anticholinergic medication on plasma CHE activity was detected; so far midazolam (P = 0.01) seems to play an important role in that process. ConclusionSpecial care might be necessary with anticholinergic medication to minimize risk for delirium in palliative cancer patients.

Neuroleptic Administration to Oncologic Patients Under Palliative Care

Introduction Difficulties in controlling symptoms such as pain, breathlessness or delirium in palliative care patients, may require sedation as therapeutic strategy. Objective To study the drugs administered to patients under Palliative Care Sedation (PCS) and its possible side effects. Methods Our retrospective study included 40 oncological patients with mean age of 69+14.12 years old, under PCS. Results Morphine 0.35mg/kg/day, administered to 22,5% (9) patients, caused reduction of systolic blood pressure in 23.61%, diastolic blood pressure in 27.08%, heart rate in 6.09%, body temperature in 2.59%, respiratory rate in 18.26%. Morphine 0.35mg/kg/day associated with midazolam 0.42mg/kg/day, given to 35%(14) patients, caused reduction of systolic blood pressure in 24.63%, diastolic blood pressure in 27.58%, heart rate in 1.56%, body temperature in 1.58%, respiratory rate in 27.66%. The association of chlorpromazine 0.62mg/kg/day to morphine 0.35mg/kg/day and midazolam 0.42mg/kg/day administered to 42,5% (17) patients, also caused reduction of systolic blood pressure in 22.38%, diastolic blood pressure 20.00%, body temperature 1.79%, respiratory rate 22.00%, but the heart rate increased in 15.88%. The variations of vital signs were obtained by records registered right before the palliative care sedation had initiated and the values recorded in patients’ last day of life. The sedation period was 2,40+0,23days. Conclusion The association of neuroleptics could conduct to extrapyramidal motor agitation, in this case of deeply sedated patients it could be signed by the incresase of the heart rate. Considering the short period of time between the beginning of sedation and the patients’ death; and that palliative sedation should not include the hastening of patients’ death, we suggest a better drug association criteria.

Delirium in adult patients receiving palliative care: A systematic review of the literature

Delirium in palliative care patients is common and its diagnosis and treatment is a major challenge. Our objective was to perform a literature analysis in two phases on the recent scientific evidence (2007–2012) on the diagnosis and treatment of delirium in adults receiving palliative care. In phase 1 (descriptive studies and narrative reviews) 133 relevant articles were identified: 73 addressed the issue of delirium secondarily, and 60 articles as the main topic. However, only 4 prospective observational studies in which delirium was central were identified. Of 135 articles analysed in phase 2 (clinical trials or descriptive studies on treatment of delirium in palliative care patients), only 3 were about prevention or treatment: 2 retrospective studies and one clinical trial on multicomponent prevention in cancer patients. Much of the recent literature is related to reviews on studies conducted more than a decade ago and on patients different to those receiving palliative care. In conclusion, recent scientific evidence on delirium in palliative care is limited and suboptimal. Prospective studies are urgently needed that focus specifically on this highly vulnerable population.

Delírium en adultos que reciben cuidados paliativos: revisión de la literatura con un enfoque sistemático

Delirium in palliative care patients is common and its diagnosis and treatment is a major challenge. Our objective was to perform a literature analysis in two phases on the recent scientific evidence (2007-2012) on the diagnosis and treatment of delirium in adults receiving palliative care. In phase 1 (descriptive studies and narrative reviews) 133 relevant articles were identified: 73 addressed the issue of delirium secondarily, and 60 articles as the main topic. However, only 4 prospective observational studies in which delirium was central were identified. Of 135 articles analysed in phase 2 (clinical trials or descriptive studies on treatment of delirium in palliative care patients), only 3 were about prevention or treatment: 2 retrospective studies and one clinical trial on multicomponent prevention in cancer patients. Much of the recent literature is related to reviews on studies conducted more than a decade ago and on patients different to those receiving palliative care. In conclusion, recent scientific evidence on delirium in palliative care is limited and suboptimal. Prospective studies are urgently needed that focus specifically on this highly vulnerable population.

A longitudinal study of motor subtypes in delirium: Relationship with other phenomenology, etiology, medication exposure and prognosis

Objective Motor subtypes have promise as a means of identifying clinically relevant delirium subgroups. Little is known about their relationship to etiologies, medication exposure, and outcomes. Methods Consecutive cases of DSM-IV delirium in palliative care patients were assessed twice-weekly throughout their delirium episodes using the Delirium Motor Subtype Scale (DMSS), Delirium Etiology Checklist (DEC) and Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98 (DRS-R98). Results 100 patients [mean age 70.2±10.5] were assessed on 303 visits [range 2–9]. Over the entire episode, mean DRS-R98 Severity scores were 16.2±5.7. The mean number of etiologies per case was 3.4±1.2. Motor subtypes were no subtype throughout (6%), hypoactive subtype throughout (28%), mixed subtype throughout (18%), hyperactive subtype throughout (10%) and variable subtype (38%). DRS-R98 Total and Severity scales differed significantly across categories (highest in mixed) but only motor, sleep–wake cycle, perceptual and language disturbance items differed. The Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) approach was used to explore the relationship between subtype profile and symptoms, medication exposure and etiology. This showed that apart from motor items, only delusions, affective lability, metabolic disturbance and CVA related to any subtype. Cross-sectional assessments indicated greater use of benzodiazepine and antipsychotics in hyperactive patients but GEE analyses did not identify major associations between motor subtype and medication exposure. Patients with sustained hypoactive subtype were significantly more likely to die within one month of study entry. Conclusions Motor profile in delirium is relatively consistent over episode course and relates more closely to delirium phenomenology than to etiology or medication exposure. Motor subtypes have comparable disturbance of key diagnostic features such as cognitive and thought process abnormalities. Although mixed subtype is the most phenomenologically intense, hypoactives have the poorest prognosis.

Delirium in Palliative Care Patients: Focus on Pharmacotherapy

Patients receiving palliative care often possess multiple risk factors and predisposing conditions for delirium. The impact of delirium on patient care in this population may also be far-reaching: affecting not only quality of remaining life but the dying process experienced by patients, caregivers, and the medical team as well. As palliative care focuses on comfort and symptom management, the approach to assessment and subsequent treatment of delirium in palliative care patients may prove difficult for providers to navigate. This article summarizes the multifactorial nature, numerous predisposing medical risk factors, neuropsychiatric adverse effects of palliative medications, pharmacokinetic changes, and challenges complicating delirium assessment and provides a systematic framework for assessment. The benefits, risks, and patient-specific considerations for treatment selection are also discussed.

Methods for assessment of cognitive failure and delirium in palliative care patients: implications for practice and research.

The most commonly encountered clinical conditions presenting with cognitive failure (CF) are delirium, dementia and amnestic disorders. Of these, delirium is probably the most prevalent in palliative care, and it is potentially reversible. Thus, improvement in diagnostics seems warranted. The objectives of this review were to examine the methods for assessment of CF and delirium in palliative care. Twenty-two studies were reviewed: 64% were published in 2000 or later. Twelve reports focused on delirium, six on CF, while the remaining four assessed confusion (2), hallucinations and general psychological morbidity. Median sample size was 100 (20393). Ten different instruments were used: The Mini Mental State Exam was used in 13 studies. Five studies were validation reports of new or existing instruments. The term CF is an imprecise description of a loss in one or more of the cognitive functions. The interchangeable use of CF as a description of specific diagnoses should be avoided, as this contributes to prevalence rates that are not representative. Assessment tools that discriminate between the different diagnostic entities presenting with CF should be used in future studies.