Search

Background: Thiamine di-phosphate is an essential cofactor in glucose metabolism, glutamate transformation and acetylcholinesterase activity, pathways associated with delirium occurrence. We hypothesised that a deficiency in whole blood thiamine and intravenous thiamine supplementation could impact delirium occurrence., Aim: To establish whether a deficiency in whole blood thiamine and/or intravenous thiamine supplementation within 72 h of intensive care admission is associated with delirium occurrence., Method: The first dataset was secondary analysis of a previous study in an intensive care unit in the Netherlands, reported in 2017. The second dataset contained consecutive intensive care admissions 2 years before (period 1: October 2014 to October 2016) and after (period 2: April 2017 to April 2019) routine thiamine supplementation was introduced within 72 h of admission. Delirium was defined as a positive Confusion Assessment Method-Intensive Care Unit score(s) in 24 h., Results: Analysis of the first dataset (n = 57) using logistic regression showed no relationship between delirium and sepsis or whole blood thiamine, but a significant association with age (p = 0.014). In the second dataset (n = 3074), 15.1% received IV thiamine in period 1 and 62.6% during period 2. Hierarchical regression analysis reported reduction in delirium occurrence in the second period; this did not reach statistical significance, OR = 0.81 (95% CI 0.652-1.002); p = 0.052., Conclusion: No relationship was detected between whole blood thiamine and delirium occurrence on admission, at 24 and 48 h. It remains unclear whether routine intravenous thiamine supplementation during intensive care admission impacts delirium occurrence. Further prospective randomised clinical trials are needed., (© 2024. Crown.)

Background: The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of a structured educational intervention on the implementation of guideline-recommended pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD) assessment., Methods: This was a prospective, multinational, interventional before-after trial conducted at 12 intensive care units from 10 centers in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and the UK. Intensive care units underwent a 6-week structured educational program, comprising online lectures, instructional videos, educational handouts, and bedside teaching. Patient-level PAD assessment data were collected in three 1-day point-prevalence assessments before (T1), 6 weeks after (T2), and 1 year after (T3) the educational program., Results: A total of 430 patients were included. The rate of patients who received all three PAD assessments changed from 55% (107/195) at T1 to 53% (68/129) at T2, but increased to 73% (77/106) at T3 (p = 0.003). The delirium screening rate increased from 64% (124/195) at T1 to 65% (84/129) at T2 and 77% (82/106) at T3 (p = 0.041). The pain assessment rate increased from 87% (170/195) at T1 to 92% (119/129) at T2 and 98% (104/106) at T3 (p = 0.005). The rate of sedation assessment showed no signficiant change. The proportion of patients who received nonpharmacological delirium prevention measures increased from 58% (114/195) at T1 to 80% (103/129) at T2 and 91% (96/106) at T3 (p < 0.001). Multivariable regression revealed that at T3, patients were more likely to receive a delirium assessment (odds ratio [OR] 2.138, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.206-3.790; p = 0.009), sedation assessment (OR 4.131, 95% CI 1.372-12.438; p = 0.012), or all three PAD assessments (OR 2.295, 95% CI 1.349-3.903; p = 0.002) compared with T1., Conclusions: In routine care, many patients were not assessed for PAD. Assessment rates increased significantly 1 year after the intervention. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03553719., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Delirium, a common syndrome with heterogeneous etiologies and clinical presentations, is associated with poor long-term outcomes. Recording and analyzing all delirium equally could be hindering the field's understanding of pathophysiology and identification of targeted treatments. Current delirium subtyping methods reflect clinically evident features but likely do not account for underlying biology., Methods: The Delirium Subtyping Initiative (DSI) held three sessions with an international panel of 25 experts., Results: Meeting participants suggest further characterization of delirium features to complement the existing Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition Text Revision diagnostic criteria. These should span the range of delirium-spectrum syndromes and be measured consistently across studies. Clinical features should be recorded in conjunction with biospecimen collection, where feasible, in a standardized way, to determine temporal associations of biology coincident with clinical fluctuations., Discussion: The DSI made recommendations spanning the breadth of delirium research including clinical features, study planning, data collection, and data analysis for characterization of candidate delirium subtypes., Highlights: Delirium features must be clearly defined, standardized, and operationalized. Large datasets incorporating both clinical and biomarker variables should be analyzed together. Delirium screening should incorporate communication and reasoning., (© 2023 The Authors. Alzheimer's & Dementia published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Alzheimer's Association.)

Background: Delirium predicts poor outcomes, however identifying patients with the worst outcomes is challenging. Plasma neurofilament light protein (NfL) is a sensitive indicator of neuronal damage. We undertook an exploratory observational study to determine the association between plasma NfL and delirium in the critically ill., Methods: MoDUS was a randomised placebo-controlled delirium trial of simvastatin done in an UK adult general ICU. We measured NfL levels in plasma samples using a Single molecule array (Simoa) platform. We explored associations between patient's plasma NfL levels and number of delirium days, and clinical outcomes. The control group for baseline NfL were preoperative patients undergoing major surgery., Findings: The majority of critically ill patients already had a high NfL level on admission. Patients with higher plasma NfL levels at days one and three spent more days in delirium or deep sedation. Patients with zero or one day in delirium or deep sedation had day one mean concentrations of 37.8 pg/ml (SD 32.6) compared with 96.5 pg/ml (SD 106.1)) for patients with two days or more, p-value 0.002 linear mixed effects model. Survivors discharged before 14 days had lower mean plasma NfL concentrations compared to those with longer hospital stays and/or who died within six months. The area under ROC curve for predicting death within six months using day one NfL was 0.81 (0.7,0.9)., Interpretation: Measurement of plasma NfL within three days of admission may be useful to identify those patients with worse clinical outcomes, and as an enrichment strategy for future delirium interventional trials in the critically ill., Funding: Alzheimer's Society UK, UK Dementia Research Institute., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Delirium is a clinical syndrome occurring in heterogeneous patient populations. It affects 45-87% of critical care patients and is often associated with adverse outcomes including acquired dementia, institutionalisation, and death. Despite an exponential increase in delirium research in recent years, the pathophysiological mechanisms resulting in the clinical presentation of delirium are still hypotheses. Efforts have been made to categorise the delirium spectrum into clinically meaningful subgroups (subphenotypes), using psychomotor subtypes such as hypoactive, hyperactive, and mixed, for example, and also inflammatory and non-inflammatory delirium. Delirium remains, however, a constellation of symptoms resulting from a variety of risk factors and precipitants with currently no successful targeted pharmacological treatment. Identifying specific clinical and biological subphenotypes will greatly improve understanding of the relationship between the clinical symptoms and the putative pathways and thus risk factors, precipitants, natural history, and biological mechanism. This will facilitate risk factor mitigation, identification of potential methods for interventional studies, and informed patient and family counselling. Here, we review evidence to date and propose a framework to identify subphenotypes. Endotype identification may be done by clustering symptoms with their biological mechanism, which will facilitate research of targeted treatments. In order to achieve identification of delirium subphenotypes, the following steps must be taken: (1) robust records of symptoms must be kept at a clinical level. (2) Global collaboration must facilitate large, heterogeneous research cohorts. (3) Patients must be clustered for identification, validation, and mapping of subphenotype stability., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Delirium is an acute confusional state, common in critical illness and associated with cognitive decline. There is no effective pharmacotherapy to prevent or treat delirium, although it is scientifically plausible that thiamine could be effective. Thiamine studies in dementia patients are inconclusive. Aside from small numbers, all used oral administration: bioavailability of thiamine is poor; parenteral thiamine bypasses this. In the UK, parenteral thiamine is administered as a compound vitamin B and C solution (Pabrinex®). The aim of this review is to evaluate the effectiveness of parenteral thiamine (alone or in a compound solution) in preventing or treating delirium in critical illness., Methods: We will search for studies in electronic databases (MEDLINE (Pro-Quest), EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, CNKI, AMED, and Cochrane CENTRAL), clinical trials registries (WHO International Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Controlled-trials.com), and grey literature (Google Scholar, conference proceedings, and Index to Theses). We will perform complementary searches of reference lists of included studies, relevant reviews, clinical practice guidelines, or other pertinent documents (e.g. official documents and government reports). We will consider quasi-randomised or randomised controlled trials in critically ill adults. We will include studies that evaluate parenteral thiamine versus standard of care, placebo, or any other non-pharmacological or pharmacological interventions. The primary outcomes will be the delirium core outcome set, including incidence and severity of delirium and cognition. Secondary outcomes are adapted from the ventilation core outcome set: duration of mechanical ventilation, length of stay, and adverse events incidence. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment will be undertaken independently by two reviewers. If data permits, we will conduct meta-analyses using a random effects model and, where appropriate, sensitivity and subgroup analyses to explore sources of heterogeneity., Discussion: This review will provide evidence for the effectiveness of parental thiamine in the prevention or treatment of delirium in critical care. Findings will contribute to establishing the need for a multicentre study of parenteral thiamine in the prevention and treatment of critical care delirium., Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42019118808.

Introduction: Delirium is a common, serious and potentially preventable condition with devastating impact on the quality of life prompting a proliferation of interventional trials. Core outcome sets aim to standardise outcome reporting by identifying outcomes perceived fundamental for measurement in trials of a specific interest area. Our aim is to develop international consensus on two core outcome sets for trials of interventions to prevent and/or treat delirium, irrespective of study population. We aim to identify additional core outcomes specific to the critically ill, acutely hospitalised patients, palliative care and older adults., Methods and Analysis: We will conduct a systematic review of published and ongoing delirium trials (1980 onwards) and one-on-one interviews of patients who have experienced delirium and family members. These data will inform Delphi round 1 of a two-stage consensus process. In round 2, we will provide participants their own response, summarised group responses and those of patient/family participants for rescoring. We will randomise participants to receive feedback as proportion scoring the outcome as critical or as group mean responses. We will hold a consensus meeting using nominal group technique to finalise outcomes for inclusion. We will repeat the Delphi process and consensus meeting to select measures for each core outcome. We will recruit 240 Delphi participants giving us 80% power to detect a 1.0-1.5 point (9-point scale) difference by feedback method between rounds. We will analyse differences for subsequent scores, magnitude of opinion change, items retained and level of agreement., Ethics and Dissemination: We are obtaining research ethics approvals according to local governance. Participation will be voluntary and data deidentified. Support from three international delirium organisations will be instrumental in dissemination and core outcome set uptake. We will disseminate through peer-reviewed open access publications and present at conferences selected to reach a wide range of knowledge users., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Background: Delirium in critically ill patients is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Neuroinflammation might be an important mechanism in the pathogenesis of delirium, and since simvastatin has anti-inflammatory properties it might reduce delirium. We aimed to establish whether early treatment with simvastatin would decrease the time that survivors of critical illness spent in delirium or coma., Methods: We undertook this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in a general adult intensive care unit (ICU) in Watford General Hospital (Watford, UK). We enrolled critically ill patients (≥18 years) needing mechanical ventilation within 72 h of admission. We randomly assigned patients (1:1 ratio) to receive either simvastatin 80 mg or placebo daily for up to a maximum of 28 days, irrespective of coma or delirium status. We assessed delirium using the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU). The primary outcome was number of days alive and was assessed as delirium-free and coma-free in the first 14 days after being randomly allocated to receive treatment or placebo. ICU clinical and research staff and patients were masked to treatment. We did intention-to-treat analyses with no extrapolation. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Registry, number ISRCTN89079989., Findings: Between Feb 1, 2013, and July 29, 2016, 142 patients were randomly assigned to receive simvastatin (n=71) or placebo (n=71), and were included in the final analysis. The mean number of days alive without delirium and without coma at day 14 did not differ significantly between the two groups (5·7 days [SD 5·1] with simvastatin and 6·1 days [5·2] with placebo; mean difference 0·4 days, 95% CI -1·3 to 2·1; p=0·66). The most common adverse event was an elevated creatine kinase concentration to more than ten times the upper limit of normal (eight [11%] in the simvastatin group vs three [4%] in the placebo group p=0·208). No patient had a serious adverse event related to the study drug., Interpretation: These results do not support the hypothesis that simvastatin modifies duration of delirium and coma in critically ill patients., Funding: National Institute for Health Research., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Delirium, a prevalent organ dysfunction in critically ill patients, is independently associated with increased morbidity. This last decade has witnessed an exponential growth in delirium research in hospitalized patients, including those critically ill, and this research has highlighted that delirium needs to be better understood mechanistically to help foster research that will ultimately lead to its prevention and treatment. In this invited, evidence-based paper, a multinational and interprofessional group of clinicians and researchers from within the fields of critical care medicine, psychiatry, pediatrics, anesthesiology, geriatrics, surgery, neurology, nursing, pharmacy, and the neurosciences sought to address five questions: (1) What is the current standard of care in managing ICU delirium? (2) What have been the major recent advances in delirium research and care? (3) What are the common delirium beliefs that have been challenged by recent trials? (4) What are the remaining areas of uncertainty in delirium research? (5) What are some of the top study areas/trials to be done in the next 10 years? Herein, we briefly review the epidemiology of delirium, the current best practices for management of critically ill patients at risk for delirium or experiencing delirium, identify recent advances in our understanding of delirium as well as gaps in knowledge, and discuss research opportunities and barriers to implementation, with the goal of promoting an integrated research agenda.

Background: The incidence of delirium in ventilated patients is estimated at up to 82%, and it is associated with longer intensive care and hospital stays, and long-term cognitive impairment and mortality. The pathophysiology of delirium has been linked with inflammation and neuronal apoptosis. Simvastatin has pleiotropic properties; it penetrates the brain and, as well as reducing cholesterol, reduces inflammation when used at clinically relevant doses over the short term. This is a single centre randomised, controlled trial which aims to test the hypothesis that treatment with simvastatin will modify delirium incidence and outcomes., Methods/design: The ongoing study will include 142 adults admitted to the Watford General Hospital Intensive Care Unit who require mechanical ventilation in the first 72 hours of admission. The primary outcome is the number of delirium- and coma-free days in the first 14 days. Secondary outcomes include incidence of delirium, delirium- and coma-free days in the first 28 days, days in delirium and in coma at 14 and 28 days, number of ventilator-free days at 28 days, length of critical care and hospital stay, mortality, cognitive decline and healthcare resource use. Informed consent will be taken from patient's consultee before randomisation to receive either simvastatin (80 mg) or placebo once daily. Daily data will be recorded until day 28 after randomisation or until discharge from the ICU if sooner. Surviving patients will be followed up on at six months from discharge. Plasma and urine samples will be taken to investigate the biological effect of simvastatin on systemic markers of inflammation, as related to the number of delirium- and coma-free days, and the potential of cholinesterase activity and beta-amyloid as predictors of the risk of delirium and long-term cognitive impairment., Discussion: This trial will test the efficacy of simvastatin on reducing delirium in the critically ill. If patients receiving the statin show a reduced number of days in delirium compared with the placebo group, the inflammatory theory implicated in the pathogenesis of delirium will be strengthened., Trial Registration: The trial was registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Registry ( ISRCTN89079989 ) on 26 March 2013.

Rationale: Delirium is common in intensive care unit (ICU) patients and is a predictor of worse outcomes and neuroinflammation is a possible mechanism. The antiinflammatory actions of statins may reduce delirium., Objectives: To determine whether critically ill patients receiving statin therapy had a reduced risk of delirium than those not on statins., Methods: A prospective cohort analysis of data from consecutive ICU patients admitted to a UK mixed medical and surgical critical care unit between August 2011 and February 2012; the Confusion Assessment Method for ICU was used to determine the days each patient was assessed as being free of delirium during ICU admission., Measurements and Main Results: Delirium-free days, daily administration of statins, and serum C-reactive protein (CRP) were recorded. Four hundred and seventy consecutive critical care patients were followed, of whom 151 patients received statins. Using random-effects multivariable logistic regression, statin administration the previous evening was associated with the patient being assessed as free of delirium (odds ratio, 2.28; confidence interval, 1.01-5.13; P < 0.05) and with lower CRP (β = -0.52; P < 0.01) the following day. When the association between statin and being assessed as free of delirium was controlled for CRP, the effect size became nonsignificant (odds ratio, 1.56; confidence interval, 0.64-3.79; P = 0.32)., Conclusions: Ongoing statin therapy is associated with a lower daily risk of delirium in critically ill patients. An ongoing clinical trial, informed by this study, is investigating if statins are a potential therapy for delirium in the critically ill.

Delirium is known to be a predictor of adverse outcomes. In a prospective study Abelha and colleagues showed that postoperative delirium was an independent risk factor for deterioration in functional capacity following discharge. While evidence for causality remains elusive, there is no doubt that patients who develop delirium are left with new functional and cognitive impairment. Finding a pharmacological treatment for the prevention and treatment of delirium is a priority in delirium research and the results of ongoing trials are awaited. Early mobilisation of ICU patients has been demonstrated to decrease delirium and improve functional outcomes. Resources should be directed to appropriate, progressive mobilisation of all critically ill patients as a priority.

Background: Delirium is frequently diagnosed in critically ill patients and is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Haloperidol is the most commonly used drug for delirium despite little evidence of its effectiveness. The aim of this study was to establish whether early treatment with haloperidol would decrease the time that survivors of critical illness spent in delirium or coma., Methods: We did this double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial in a general adult intensive care unit (ICU). Critically ill patients (≥18 years) needing mechanical ventilation within 72 h of admission were enrolled. Patients were randomised (by an independent nurse, in 1:1 ratio, with permuted block size of four and six, using a centralised, secure web-based randomisation service) to receive haloperidol 2.5 mg or 0.9% saline placebo intravenously every 8 h, irrespective of coma or delirium status. Study drug was discontinued on ICU discharge, once delirium-free and coma-free for 2 consecutive days, or after a maximum of 14 days of treatment, whichever came first. Delirium was assessed using the confusion assessment method for the ICU (CAM-ICU). The primary outcome was delirium-free and coma-free days, defined as the number of days in the first 14 days after randomisation during which the patient was alive without delirium and not in coma from any cause. Patients who died within the 14 day study period were recorded as having 0 days free of delirium and coma. ICU clinical and research staff and patients were masked to treatment throughout the study. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Registry, number ISRCTN83567338., Findings: 142 patients were randomised, 141 were included in the final analysis (71 haloperidol, 70 placebo). Patients in the haloperidol group spent about the same number of days alive, without delirium, and without coma as did patients in the placebo group (median 5 days [IQR 0-10] vs 6 days [0-11] days; p=0.53). The most common adverse events were oversedation (11 patients in the haloperidol group vs six in the placebo group) and QTc prolongation (seven patients in the haloperidol group vs six in the placebo group). No patient had a serious adverse event related to the study drug., Interpretation: These results do not support the hypothesis that haloperidol modifies duration of delirium in critically ill patients. Although haloperidol can be used safely in this population of patients, pending the results of trials in progress, the use of intravenous haloperidol should be reserved for short-term management of acute agitation., Funding: National Institute for Health Research., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Delirium in the intensive care unit (ICU) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Using an assessment tool has been shown to improve the ability of clinicians in the ICU to detect delirium. The confusion assessment method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) is a validated delirium-screening tool for critically ill intubated patients. The aim of this project was to establish the feasibility of routine delirium screening using the CAM-ICU and to identify the incidence of delirium in a UK critical care unit., Methods: Routine CAM-ICU monitoring was implemented in a mixed critical care unit in January 2007 following a two-month educational and promotional campaign. Guidelines for the management of delirium were introduced. During a two-month prospective audit in September and October 2007, the daily CAM-ICU was recorded by the bedside nurse for consecutive level 2 and level 3 patients admitted to the mixed medical/surgical critical care ward in a district general hospital. This was repeated in January 2008. Patient outcome was recorded. The records of an additional cohort of ventilated patients were reviewed retrospectively to determine compliance with routine CAM-ICU assessments., Results: Seventy-one patients were included in the observational cohort, with 60 patients in the retrospective cohort. In the prospective group it was not possible to assess for delirium with the CAM-ICU in nine patients due to persistent coma or inability to understand simple instructions. Excluding elective post-operative patients, the incidence of delirium was 45% in patients who could be assessed; in the 27 ventilated patients who could be assessed it was 63%. From the retrospective data compliance with the CAM-ICU assessment was 92%. The incidence of delirium in this retrospective group of ventilated patients who could be assessed was 65%., Conclusions: We have demonstrated that delirium screening is feasible in a UK ICU population. The high incidence of delirium and the impact on outcomes in this UK cohort of patients is in line with previous reports.

Reade et al. studied 20 agitated intubated patients in a pilot open-label trial comparing the efficacy of dexmedetomidine versus haloperidol in facilitating extubation. While the study design had limitations, which are outlined by the authors themselves in the paper published in this issue of Critical Care, the study demonstrated an impressive reduction in time to extubation and length of stay. Dexmedetomidine is a promising sedative agent that acts via alpha2-receptors and has been shown to decrease prevalence and duration of delirium in mechanically ventilated patients. Haloperidol is the recommended and standard drug to treat delirium, largely based on large case series and reports. Delirium is a common, underdiagnosed and serious problem in intensive care unit patients. Agitated delirious patients are at risk of immediate adverse events as well as prolonged respiratory support. All delirious patients are at risk of poor cognitive outcomes. Further research is needed into the pharmacological management of delirium, including the use of dexmedetomidine in the management of agitation and the clinical efficacy of haloperidol.

BACKGROUND: Delirium, a common syndrome with heterogeneous etiologies and clinical presentations, is associated with poor long‐term outcomes. Recording and analyzing all delirium equally could be hindering the field's understanding of pathophysiology and identification of targeted treatments. Current delirium subtyping methods reflect clinically evident features but likely do not account for underlying biology. METHODS: The Delirium Subtyping Initiative (DSI) held three sessions with an international panel of 25 experts. RESULTS: Meeting participants suggest further characterization of delirium features to complement the existing Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition Text Revision diagnostic criteria. These should span the range of delirium‐spectrum syndromes and be measured consistently across studies. Clinical features should be recorded in conjunction with biospecimen collection, where feasible, in a standardized way, to determine temporal associations of biology coincident with clinical fluctuations. DISCUSSION: The DSI made recommendations spanning the breadth of delirium research including clinical features, study planning, data collection, and data analysis for characterization of candidate delirium subtypes. Highlights: Delirium features must be clearly defined, standardized, and operationalized.Large datasets incorporating both clinical and biomarker variables should be analyzed together.Delirium screening should incorporate communication and reasoning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors reflects on several studies regarding the effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs for the treatment of intensive care unit (ICU) delirium and mentions that earlier studies have shown that antipsychotics control symptoms of agitation.

The article presents insights on a study of delirium in patients on the intensive care unit (ICU). Topics discussed include the challenges in exploring associations between delirium and death in critically ill patients, the use of a marginal structural model in analyzing the data for the study and the possible link between longer duration of delirium and smaller brain volumes.

The author reflects on the study regarding the risk of statins exposure and delirium. The author reflects on several topics, which include delirium which is a common syndrome which affects 60-80% of critically ill patients during the admission, cohort analysis 470 consecutive intensive care unit (ICU) patients who showed similar decrease in the risk of delirium after statin administration, and patients with higher C-reactive protein levels with lower probability of having delirium.