Document Detail

Delirium screening in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  22610196     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
OBJECTIVE: Despite its frequency and impact, delirium in critically ill patients is poorly recognized. Our aim was to systematically review the accuracy of delirium screening instruments in critically ill patients.
DATA SOURCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis of publications between 1966 and 2011. The Medline and Embase databases were searched for studies on delirium in critically ill patients.
STUDY SELECTION: The meta-analysis was limited to studies in critically ill patients in intensive care units, surgical wards, or emergency rooms. The delirium screening tool had to be feasible in a clinical setting for use by a nonexpert. As the gold standard, delirium had to be diagnosed based on appropriate criteria by a delirium expert.
DATA EXTRACTION: The outcomes assessed were sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and summary receiver operating characteristics curves.
DATA SYNTHESIS: Sixteen studies covering 1,523 participants and five screening tools were included in the systematic review. The pooled sensitivities and specificities of Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit for detection of delirium in critically ill patients were 75.5% and 95.8%, and for Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist 80.1% and 74.6%, respectively. All but one study was performed in a research setting, and that one study suggested that with routine use of the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit, half of the patients with delirium were not detected.
CONCLUSIONS: The Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit was the most specific bedside tool for the assessment of delirium in critically ill patients. However, there was significant heterogeneity of the results. These findings were largely obtained in research settings, and the low sensitivity of the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit in routine, daily practice may limit its use as a screening test.
Ary Serpa Neto; Antônio P Nassar; Sérgio O Cardoso; José A Manetta; Victor G M Pereira; Daniel C Espósito; Maria C T Damasceno; Arjen J Slooter
Related Documents :
22640406 - Measuring workload for tuberculosis service provision at primary care level: a methodol...
22394366 - Epoprostenol use for pulmonary arterial hypertension in the palliative care setting.
18508226 - Integrated results of 2 phase 3 studies comparing tigecycline and levofloxacin in commu...
22798476 - Using opioids to treat dyspnea in advanced copd: attitudes and experiences of family ph...
23150906 - Independence, institutionalization, death and treatment costs 18 months after rehabilit...
18555646 - Quality measurement and public reporting in total joint arthroplasty.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Meta-Analysis; Review    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Critical care medicine     Volume:  40     ISSN:  1530-0293     ISO Abbreviation:  Crit. Care Med.     Publication Date:  2012 Jun 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2012-05-21     Completed Date:  2012-07-13     Revised Date:  2013-02-07    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  0355501     Medline TA:  Crit Care Med     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  1946-51     Citation Subset:  AIM; IM    
Medical Intensive Care Unit, ABC Medical School (FMABC), Santo André, Brazil.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Critical Illness*
Delirium / diagnosis*
Intensive Care Units
Mass Screening / methods*
Sensitivity and Specificity
Comment In:
Crit Care Med. 2013 Jan;41(1):e2-3   [PMID:  23269167 ]

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Treatment of acute coronary syndrome: Part 2: ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
Next Document:  Immune to addiction: the ethical dimensions of vaccines against substance abuse.