Nursing perspectives on the confusion assessment method: a qualitative focus group study.

Background: the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) is commonly used to detect delirium. Although accurate when administered by trained researchers, its sensitivity is low when performed by nurses in clinical practice. We aimed to understand the perspectives of nurses who used the CAM on orthopaedic wards. Design: qualitative focus group study. Setting: two academic hospitals in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Participants: forty-three nurses who worked on orthopaedic inpatient units and used the CAM daily participated in one of eight focus group sessions. Measurements: structured focus groups explored nurses' perception of delirium and the use of the CAM. Each transcript was coded and sampling continued until theme saturation. Results: the participants (84% female, mean age 40 years, mean years in practice 12.8) had mixed feelings about the CAM. Some nurses praised its simplicity, while others preferred a narrative description of the delirium episode. Only 35% recalled receiving training to administer the CAM. Across the groups, disorientation was inappropriately used to evaluate level of consciousness and inattention. Objective testing was reportedly rarely used for assessing inattention. Most nurses retrospectively completed the CAM at the end of their shift by extrapolating from earlier observations rather than formally administering the tool. Reported challenges included differentiating delirium from dementia, assessing non-verbal patients and those with language barriers, time constraints, discrepancy with physicians' assessments and pressure to diagnose delirium. Conclusion: despite its widespread use, the CAM was poorly understood by orthopaedic nurses at two academic institutions. The CAM may be difficult to implement in practice.

Comparative response assessment by serum immunoglobulin M M-protein and total serum immunoglobulin M after treatment of patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia.

Serum immunoglobulin (Ig) M monoclonal protein determined by electrophoresis (sIgM-MP) and total serum IgM (sIgM) by nephelometry are widely used for response assessment in Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM), although have not been compared for predicting changes in underlying disease burden. We, therefore, compared these serum markers with changes in bone marrow (BM) and extramedullary disease for 73 patients who were rituximab naive and treated with a rituximab-containing regimen. By linear regression analysis, reductions in sIgM-MP and sIgM showed moderate correlation with BM disease involvement (r = 0.4051 and r = 0.4490, respectively), and did not differ from one another as estimators of BM disease response (P = .3745). Neither sIgM-MP nor sIgM showed a strong correlation with BM disease response in patients with low (<1000 mg/dL) or high (>5000 mg/dL) IgM levels and extramedullary disease response. sIgM-MP and sIgM, therefore, are comparable response markers in WM. Development of newer, more accurate surrogate response markers are needed to better delineate treatment outcomes in patients with WM and with low or high IgM levels, and extramedullary disease.

Response assessment in Waldenström macroglobulinaemia: update from the VIth International Workshop.

This report represents a further update of the consensus panel criteria for the assessment of clinical response in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinaemia (WM). These criteria have been updated in light of further data demonstrating an improvement in categorical responses with new drug regimens as well as acknowledgement of the fact that such responses are predictive of overall outcome. A number of key changes are proposed but challenges do however remain and these include the variability in kinetics of immunoglobulin M (IgM) reduction with different treatment modalities and the apparent discrepancy between IgM and bone marrow/tissue response noted with some regimens. Planned sequential bone marrow assessments are encouraged in clinical trials.

Digoxin prescribing for heart failure in elderly residents of long-term care facilities.

BACKGROUND: Digoxin is often used in long-term care (LTC) residents with heart failure despite a high risk of toxicity associated with increased age, comorbidities and polypharmacy. This toxicity may occur at serum digoxin concentrations that are as low as 1.54 nmol/L. OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of digoxin use, estimate the proportion at risk of toxicity and identify correlates of digoxin use in LTC residents with heart failure. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey in eight LTC facilities that lodge a total of 1223 residents. RESULTS: The prevalence of heart failure was 20%. Digoxin was prescribed for 32% of residents with heart failure and was associated with arrhythmia (primarily atrial fibrillation), anticoagulant and diuretic use, and higher serum thyroid-stimulating hormone. Digoxin doses higher than those that achieve the recommended therapeutic peak body stores of 6 microg/kg and 10 microg/kg were prescribed to 80% and 33% of residents with heart failure, respectively. Serum digoxin concentrations were greater than 1.5 nmol/L in 30% of patients. Comorbidities and concurrently prescribed medications that increase the risk of digoxin toxicity were prescribed to 26% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-third of LTC residents with heart failure received digoxin. Atrial fibrillation was the most important determinant of use. At least 26% of these residents were exposed to an increased risk of digoxin toxicity. Studies are required to determine safe and effective digoxin dosing regimens for frail elderly heart failure patients. Clinicians should exercise caution when using digoxin in LTC residents.