Comparison of delirium detection tools in acute care

Background Delirium is a frequent psychopathological syndrome in geriatric patients. It is sometimes the only symptom of acute illness and bears a high risk for complications. Therefore, feasible assessments are needed for delirium detection. Objective and methods Rapid review of available delirium assessments based on a current Medline search and cross-reference check with a special focus on those implemented in acute care hospital settings. Results A total of 75 delirium detection tools were identified. Many focused on inattention as well as acute onset and/or fluctuating course of cognitive changes as key features for delirium. A range of assessments are based on the confusion assessment method (CAM) that has been adapted for various clinical settings. The need for a collateral history, time resources and staff training are major challenges in delirium assessment. Latest tests address these through a two-step approach, such as the ultrabrief (UB) CAM or by optional assessment of temporal aspects of cognitive changes (4 As test, 4AT). Most delirium screening assessments are validated for patient interviews, some are suitable for monitoring delirium symptoms over time or diagnosing delirium based on collateral history only. Conclusion Besides the CAM the 4AT has become well-established in acute care because of its good psychometric properties and practicability. There are several other instruments extending and improving the possibilities of delirium detection in different clinical settings.

Oral Care in Acute Stroke

Purpose: Stroke impacts independent activities, particularly personal care such as oral hygiene. Existing guidelines lack details about how to provide effective oral care. This study explores the frequency of oral care based on staff adherence to oral care policies. Method: As part of a quality improvement initiative, we conducted a retrospective chart review of 30 consecutive stroke admissions to an acute care hospital. Patients with primary intracerebral hemorrhage or ischemic stroke were eligible. Sources of information included a decision support database and an electronic chart review. Data collection included length of hospitalization, stroke type, presence of infections, oral mechanism exam, dysphagia evaluations, and daily personal care provision by nursing staff (e.g., oral care and bathing). Results: Twenty-seven patients met the inclusion criteria. They had a mean age of 74 years, and 52% were men. Most had supratentorial stroke (86%) with comparable frequencies of right (48%) and left (52%) hemisphere lesions. In over half of the cases, provision of oral care was not documented at any point during the patients' hospitalization ( Mdn = 128 hr). Pericare and bathing were about twice and 4 times more frequent than oral care, respectively. Conclusions: Oral care after stroke is challenging. Existing oral care recommendations from stroke guidelines lack sufficient detail and warrant reconsideration for optimal and routine implementation particularly in acute settings. Education around oral care and associated protocols are necessary to advance oral care practices and improve stroke recovery.

Reconstructing transmission chains of SARS-CoV-2 amid multiple outbreaks in a geriatric acute-care hospital

Background There is ongoing uncertainty regarding transmission chains and the respective roles of healthcare workers (HCWs) and elderly patients in nosocomial outbreaks of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS–CoV–2) in geriatric settings. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study including patients with nosocomial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID–19) in four outbreak–affected wards, and all SARS–CoV–2 RT–PCR positive HCWs from a Swiss university–affiliated geriatric acute–care hospital that admitted both Covid–19 and non–Covid–19 patients during the first pandemic wave in Spring 2020. We combined epidemiological and genetic sequencing data using a Bayesian modelling framework, and reconstructed transmission dynamics of SARS–CoV–2 involving patients and HCWs, in order to determine who infected whom. We evaluated general transmission patterns according to type of case (HCWs working in dedicated Covid–19 cohorting wards: HCWcovid; HCWs working in non–Covid–19 wards where outbreaks occurred: HCWoutbreak; patients with nosocomial Covid–19: patientnoso) by deriving the proportion of infections attributed to each type of case across all posterior trees and comparing them to random expectations. Results During the study period (March 1 to May 7, 2020) we included 180 SARS–CoV–2 positive cases: 127 HCWs (91 HCWcovid, 36 HCWoutbreak) and 53 patients. The attack rates ranged from 10–19% for patients, and 21% for HCWs. We estimated that there were 16 importation events (3 patients, 13 HCWs) that jointly led to 16 secondary cases. Most patient–to–patient transmission events involved patients having shared a ward (97.6%, 95% credible interval [CrI] 90.4–100%), in contrast to those having shared a room (44.4%, 95%CrI 27.8–62.5%). Transmission events tended to cluster by type of case: patientnoso were almost twice as likely to be infected by other patientnoso than expected (observed:expected ratio 1.91, 95%CrI 1.08 – 4.00, p = 0.02); similarly, HCWoutbreak were more than twice as likely to be infected by other HCWoutbreak than expected (2.25, 95%CrI 1.00–8.00, p = 0.04). The proportion of infectors of HCWcovid were as expected as random. The proportions of high transmitters (≥2 secondary cases) were significantly higher among HCWoutbreak than patientnoso in the late phases (26.2% vs. 13.4%, p<2.2e–16) of the outbreak. Conclusions Most importation events were linked to HCW. Unexpectedly, transmission between HCWcovid was more limited than transmission between patients and HCWoutbreak. This highlights gaps in infection control and suggests possible areas of improvements to limit the extent of nosocomial transmission.

Fully Vaccinated and Boosted Patients Requiring Hospitalization for COVID-19: an Observational Cohort Analysis

Objective: Real-world data on the effectiveness of boosters against COVID-19, especially as new variants continue to emerge, is limited. It is our objective to assess demographic, clinical, and outcome variables of patients requiring hospitalization for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection comparing fully vaccinated and boosted (FV&B) and unvaccinated (UV) patients. Methods: This multicenter observational cohort analysis compared demographic, clinical, and outcome variables in FV&B and UV adults hospitalized for COVID-19. A sub-analysis of FV&B patients requiring intensive care (ICU) care versus non-ICU care was performed to describe and analyze common symptom presentations, initial vital signs, initial laboratory workup, and pertinent medication use in these two groups. Results: Between August 12th, 2021 and December 6th, 2021, 4,571 patient encounters had a primary diagnosis of COVID-19 and required inpatient treatment at an acute-care hospital system in Southeastern Michigan. Of the 4,571 encounters requiring hospitalization, 65(1.4%) were FV&B and 2,935(64%) were UV. FV&B individuals were older (74 [67, 81] vs 58 [45, 70]; p <0.001) with a higher proportion of immunocompromised individuals (32.3% vs 10.4%; p<0.001). Despite a significantly higher baseline risk of in-hospital mortality in the FV&B group compared to the UV (Elixhauser 16 vs 8 (p <0.001)), there was a trend toward lower in-hospital mortality (7.7% vs 12.1%; p=0.38) among FV&B patients. Other severe outcomes followed this same trend, with 7.7% of FV&B vs 11.1% UV patients needing mechanical ventilation and 4.6% vs 10.6% of patients needing vasopressors in each group, respectively (p=0.5 and 0.17). Conclusions: Fully vaccinated and boosted individuals requiring hospital-level care for breakthrough COVID-19 tended to have less severe outcomes despite appearing to be higher risk at baseline when compared to unvaccinated individuals during the same time period. Specifically, there was a trend that FV&B group had lower rates of mechanical ventilation, use of vasopressors, and in-hospital mortality. As COVID-19 continues to spread, larger expansive trials are needed to further identify risk factors for severe outcomes among the FV&B population.

Impact of a Dementia-friendly Program on Detection and Management of Patients with Cognitive Impairment and Delirium in Acute-care Hospital Units: A Controlled Clinical Trial Design

Background: Frail older persons with cognitive impairment (CI) are at special risk of experiencing delirium during acute hospitalisation. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether a dementia-friendly hospital program contributes to improved detection and management of patients with CI and risk of delirium at an acute-care hospital in Norway. Furthermore, we aimed to explore whether the program affected the prevalence of delirium, pharmacological treatment, 30-day re-hospitalisation, 30-day mortality and institutionalisation afterwards. Methods: This study had a controlled clinical trial design with a historical control group. It was conducted at two different medical wards at a large acute-care hospital in Norway from September 2018 to December 2019. A total of 423 acute hospitalised patients 75 years of age or older were included in the study. Delirium screening and cognitive tests were recorded by research staff with the 4 ‘A’s Test (4AT) and the Confusion Assessment Measure (CAM), while demographic and medical information was recorded from the electronic medical records (EMR). Results: Implementation of the dementia-friendly hospital program did not show any significant changes in the identification of patients with CI. However, the share of patients screened with 4AT within 24 hours increased from 0% to 35.5% (P<.001). The proportion of the patients with CI identified by the clinical staff, who received measures to promote “dementia-friendly” care and reduce the risk for delirium increased by 32.2% (P<.001), compared to the control group. Furthermore, the number of patients with CI who were prescribed antipsychotic, hypnotic or sedative medications was reduced by 24.5% (P<.001). There were no differences in prevalence of delirium, 30-day readmission or 30-day mortality. Conclusions: A model for early screening and multifactorial non-pharmacological interventions for patients with CI and delirium may improve management of this patient group, and reduce prescriptions of antipsychotic, hypnotic and sedative medications. The implementation in clinical practice of early screening using quality improvement methodology deserves attention. Trial registration: The protocol of this study was retrospectively registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System with the registration number: NCT04737733 and date of registration: 03/02/2021.

Contributing Factors to Acute Care Hospital Flow: International Ideas

High-functioning acute care hospitals enable efficient patient flow from admission to discharge with the right care from the right providers at the right time. Barriers to patient flow can result in cascading events and contribute to patient harm and caregiver burnout. Quality improvement endeavours in the UK, Switzerland, Finland, and the US have shown success through addressing workplace culture, utilizing management and process theories, altering roles and responsibilities, and taking advantage of technologies. Successful and sustainable improvements tend to involve substantial planning along with engagement of stakeholders in the design and implementation of a tailored approach.