81
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Delirium epidemiology in critical care (DECCA): an international study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Delirium is a frequent source of morbidity in intensive care units (ICUs). Most data on its epidemiology is from single-center studies. Our aim was to conduct a multicenter study to evaluate the epidemiology of delirium in the ICU.

          Methods

          A 1-day point-prevalence study was undertaken in 104 ICUs from 11 countries in South and North America and Spain.

          Results

          In total, 975 patients were screened, and 497 fulfilled inclusion criteria and were enrolled (median age, 62 years; 52.5% men; 16.7% and 19.9% for ICU and hospital mortality); 64% were admitted to the ICU because of medical causes, and sepsis was the main diagnosis ( n = 76; 15.3%). In total, 265 patients were sedated with the Richmond agitation and sedation scale (RASS) deeper than -3, and only 232 (46.6%) patients could be evaluated with the confusion-assessment method for the ICU. The prevalence of delirium was 32.3%. Compared with patients without delirium, those with the diagnosis of delirium had a greater severity of illness at admission, demonstrated by higher sequential organ-failure assessment (SOFA ( P = 0.004)) and simplified acute physiology score 3 (SAPS3) scores ( P < 0.0001). Delirium was associated with increased ICU (20% versus 5.7%; P = 0.002) and hospital mortality (24 versus 8.3%; P = 0.0017), and longer ICU ( P < 0.0001) and hospital length of stay (LOS) (22 (11 to 40) versus 7 (4 to 18) days; P < 0.0001). Previous use of midazolam ( P = 0.009) was more frequent in patients with delirium. On multivariate analysis, delirium was independently associated with increased ICU mortality (OR = 3.14 (1.26 to 7.86); CI, 95%) and hospital mortality (OR = 2.5 (1.1 to 5.7); CI, 95%).

          Conclusions

          In this 1-day international study, delirium was frequent and associated with increased mortality and ICU LOS. The main modifiable risk factors associated with the diagnosis of delirium were the use of invasive devices and sedatives (midazolam).

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Incidence, risk factors and consequences of ICU delirium.

          Delirium in the critically ill is reported in 11-80% of patients. We estimated the incidence of delirium using a validated scale in a large cohort of ICU patients and determined the associated risk factors and outcomes. Prospective study in a 16-bed medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU). 820 consecutive patients admitted to ICU for more than 24 h. Tools used were: the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist for delirium, Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale for sedation, and Numerical Rating Scale for pain. Risk factors were evaluated with univariate and multivariate analysis, and factors influencing mortality were determined using Cox regression. Delirium occurred in 31.8% of 764 patients. Risk of delirium was independently associated with a history of hypertension (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.3-2.6), alcoholism (2.03, 1.2-3.2), and severity of illness (1.25, 1.03-1.07 per 5-point increment in APACHE II score) but not with age or corticosteroid use. Sedatives and analgesics increased the risk of delirium when used to induce coma (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.5-6.8), and not otherwise. Delirium was linked to longer ICU stay (11.5+/-11.5 vs. 4.4+/-3.9 days), longer hospital stay (18.2+/-15.7 vs. 13.2+/-19.4 days), higher ICU mortality (19.7% vs. 10.3%), and higher hospital mortality (26.7% vs. 21.4%). Delirium is associated with a history of hypertension and alcoholism, higher APACHE II score, and with clinical effects of sedative and analgesic drugs.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            SAPS 3—From evaluation of the patient to evaluation of the intensive care unit. Part 1: Objectives, methods and cohort description

            Objective Risk adjustment systems now in use were developed more than a decade ago and lack prognostic performance. Objective of the SAPS 3 study was to collect data about risk factors and outcomes in a heterogeneous cohort of intensive care unit (ICU) patients, in order to develop a new, improved model for risk adjustment. Design Prospective multicentre, multinational cohort study. Patients and setting A total of 19,577 patients consecutively admitted to 307 ICUs from 14 October to 15 December 2002. Measurements and results Data were collected at ICU admission, on days 1, 2 and 3, and the last day of the ICU stay. Data included sociodemographics, chronic conditions, diagnostic information, physiological derangement at ICU admission, number and severity of organ dysfunctions, length of ICU and hospital stay, and vital status at ICU and hospital discharge. Data reliability was tested with use of kappa statistics and intraclass-correlation coefficients, which were >0.85 for the majority of variables. Completeness of the data was also satisfactory, with 1 [0–3] SAPS II parameter missing per patient. Prognostic performance of the SAPS II was poor, with significant differences between observed and expected mortality rates for the overall cohort and four (of seven) defined regions, and poor calibration for most tested subgroups. Conclusions The SAPS 3 study was able to provide a high-quality multinational database, reflecting heterogeneity of current ICU case-mix and typology. The poor performance of SAPS II in this cohort underscores the need for development of a new risk adjustment system for critically ill patients. Electronic Supplementary Material Electronic supplementary material is included in the online fulltext version of this article and accessible for authorised users: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-005-2762-6
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Prospective evaluation of the Sedation-Agitation Scale for adult critically ill patients.

              Subjective scales to assess agitation and sedation in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients have rarely been tested for validity or reliability. We revised and prospectively tested the Sedation-Agitation Scale (SAS) for interrater reliability and compared it with the Ramsay scale and the Harris scale to test construct validity. A convenience sample of ICU patients was simultaneously and independently examined by pairs of trained evaluators by using the revised SAS, Ramsay, and Harris Scales. Multidisciplinary 34-bed ICU in a nonuniversity, academic medical center. Forty-five ICU patients (surgical and medical) were examined a total of 69 times by evaluator pairs. The mean patient age was 63.2 yrs, 36% were female, and 71% were intubated. When classified by using SAS, 45% were anxious or agitated (SAS 5 to 7), 26% were calm (SAS 4), and 29% were sedated (SAS 1 to 3). Interrater correlation was high for SAS (r2 = .83; p < .001) and the weighted kappa score for interrater agreement was 0.92 (p < .001). Of 41 assessments scored as Ramsay 1, 49% scored SAS 6, 41% were SAS 5, 5% were SAS 4, and 2% each were SAS 3 or 7. SAS was highly correlated with the Ramsay (r2 = .83; p < .001) and Harris (r2 = .86; p < .001) scales. SAS is both reliable (high interrater agreement) and valid (high correlation with the Harris and Ramsay scales) in assessing agitation and sedation in adult ICU patients. SAS provides additional information by stratifying agitation into three categories (compared with one for the Ramsay scale) without sacrificing validity or reliability.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Crit Care
                Critical Care
                BioMed Central
                1364-8535
                1466-609X
                2010
                23 November 2010
                : 14
                : 6
                : R210
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Intensive Care Unit and Postgraduate Program, Instituto Nacional de Câncer, 10° Andar; Praça Cruz Vermelha, 23; Rio de Janeiro-RJ; CEP: 20230-130, Brazil
                [2 ]Intensive Care Unit, Hospital da Bahia, Av. Prof. Magalhaes Neto, 1541, Pituba. Cep:41830-030, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil
                [3 ]Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Juan A. Fernandez, Cervino 3356, Buenos Aires (ZIP-1425), Argentina
                [4 ]Postgraduate Program Critical Care, Morones Prieto 3000 Doctores, 64710 Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico
                [5 ]Intensive Care Unit Hospital del Salvador y Clínica INDISA, Avenida Santa María 1810, Providencia, Zip 7500000, Santiago, Chile
                [6 ]Intensive Care Unit, Unidad de Terapia Intensiva Hospital Obrero N 1 Av Brasil s/n CP 8908, La Paz, Bolivia
                [7 ]Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Luis Vernaza, Ext. 2005 Julián Coronel y Loja, 2560300, Guayaquil, Ecuador
                [8 ]Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Naval, Avenida Santos Chocano s/n, CP 210001, Lima, Peru
                [9 ]Intensive Care Unit, Sanatorio Americano, 2466 Isabelino Bosch, CP 11600, Montevideo, Uruguay
                [10 ]Intensive Care Unit, Orlando Regional Medical Center, 86 W. Underwood, MP 80, Orlando, FL 32806, USA
                [11 ]Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Universitario de Getafe, Carretera de Toledo Km 12,500, Getafe, 28905, Madrid, Spain
                [12 ]Intensive Care Unit and Postgraduate Program, Universidad de Cartagena, Nuevo Hospital Bocagrande, Calle 5 kra 6, Cartagena, 57, Colombia
                [13 ]Intensive Care Unit, Pavilhão Pereira Filho, Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Porto Alegre, Rua Annes Dias 285 CEP-90020, Porto Alegre, Brazil
                Article
                cc9333
                10.1186/cc9333
                3220001
                21092264
                c42eccda-4d2a-49c5-bcc4-3b30e5634eca
                Copyright ©2010 Salluh et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (<url>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0</url>), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 5 August 2010
                : 21 October 2010
                : 23 November 2010
                Categories
                Research

                Emergency medicine & Trauma
                Emergency medicine & Trauma

                Comments

                Comment on this article