scholarly journals Delirium Assessment in Critically Ill Older Adults

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 175-190
Author(s):  
Maria C. Duggan ◽  
Julie Van ◽  
Eugene Wesley Ely
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sunny Singhal ◽  
Pramod Kumar ◽  
Sumitabh Singh ◽  
Srishti Saha ◽  
Aparajit Ballav Dey

Abstract Background Few studies have focused on exploring the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in older patients. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to have a better understanding of the clinical characteristics of older COVID-19 patients. Methods A systematic search of PubMed and Scopus was performed from December 2019 to May 3rd, 2020. Observational studies including older adults (age ≥ 60 years) with COVID-19 infection and reporting clinical characteristics or outcome were included. Primary outcome was assessing weighted pooled prevalence (WPP) of severity and outcomes. Secondary outcomes were clinical features including comorbidities and need of respiratory support. Result Forty-six studies with 13,624 older patients were included. Severe infection was seen in 51% (95% CI– 36-65%, I2–95%) patients while 22% (95% CI– 16-28%, I2–88%) were critically ill. Overall, 11% (95% CI– 5-21%, I2–98%) patients died. The common comorbidities were hypertension (48, 95% CI– 36-60% I2–92%), diabetes mellitus (22, 95% CI– 13-32%, I2–86%) and cardiovascular disease (19, 95% CI – 11-28%, I2–85%). Common symptoms were fever (83, 95% CI– 66-97%, I2–91%), cough (60, 95% CI– 50-70%, I2–71%) and dyspnoea (42, 95% CI– 19-67%, I2–94%). Overall, 84% (95% CI– 60-100%, I2–81%) required oxygen support and 21% (95% CI– 0-49%, I2–91%) required mechanical ventilation. Majority of studies had medium to high risk of bias and overall quality of evidence was low for all outcomes. Conclusion Approximately half of older patients with COVID-19 have severe infection, one in five are critically ill and one in ten die. More high-quality evidence is needed to study outcomes in this vulnerable patient population and factors affecting these outcomes.


2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 453-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael LaMantia ◽  
Paul Stewart ◽  
Timothy Platts-Mills ◽  
Kevin Biese ◽  
Cory Forbach ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 8
Author(s):  
Abdolreza Norouzy

Diagnosis and treatment of malnutrition should be considered in the management of COVID-19 patients to improve both short- and long-term prognosis. Patients at risk for poor outcomes and higher mortality following infection with COVID-19, namely older adults and polymorbid individuals, should be checked for malnutrition through screening and assessment.


2021 ◽  
Vol 193 (39) ◽  
pp. E1525-E1533
Author(s):  
Olivia Geen ◽  
Bram Rochwerg ◽  
Xuyi Mimi Wang
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Chriscelyn M. Tussey ◽  
Donna K. Broshek ◽  
Bernice A. Marcopulos

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Céline Gélinas ◽  
Mélanie Bérubé ◽  
Annie Chevrier ◽  
Brenda T. Pun ◽  
E. Wesley Ely ◽  
...  

BACKGROUNDDelirium is highly prevalent in critically ill patients. Its detection with valid tools is crucial.OBJECTIVETo analyze the development and psychometric properties of delirium assessment tools for critically ill adults.METHODSDatabases were searched to identify relevant studies. Inclusion criteria were English language, publication before January 2015, 30 or more patients, and patient population of critically ill adults (>18 years old). Search terms were delirium, scales, critically ill patients, adult, validity, and reliability. Thirty-six manuscripts were identified, encompassing 5 delirium assessment tools (Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU), Cognitive Test for Delirium, Delirium Detection Score, Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC), and Nursing Delirium Screening Scale). Two independent reviewers analyzed the psychometric properties of these tools by using a standardized scoring system (range, 0–20) to assess the tool development process, reliability, validity, feasibility, and implementation of each tool.RESULTSPsychometric properties were very good for the CAM-ICU (19.6) and the ICDSC (19.2), moderate for the Nursing Delirium Screening Scale (13.6), low for the Delirium Detection Score (11.2), and very low for the Cognitive Test for Delirium (8.2).CONCLUSIONSThe results indicate that the CAM-ICU and the ICDSC are the most valid and reliable delirium assessment tools for critically ill adults. Additional studies are needed to further validate these tools in critically ill patients with neurological disorders and those at various levels of sedation or consciousness.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document