Delirium and delirium severity screening in the intensive care-correspondence of screenings tools.

BACKGROUND: Delirium severity scores are gaining acceptance for measuring delirium in the intensive care unit (ICU). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the concordance between the Confusion Assessment Method for the intensive care unit (CAM-ICU)-7 and the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) as delirium severity measurement tools. METHODS: This was a prospective, comparative, observational multicentre study. This study was conducted in 18 Danish ICUs. Delirium was assessed in adult critically ill patients admitted to an ICU with a Richmond Agitation and Sedation Score (RASS) of -2 or above. ICU nurses assessed delirium with randomised paired delirium screening instruments, using the CAM-ICU, the ICDSC, and the CAM-ICU-7. The correlation between the CAM-ICU-7 and the ICDSC severity scores was evaluated for all predefined patient subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 1126 paired screenings were conducted by 127 ICU nurses in 850 patients. The patients' median age was 70 years (interquartile range: 61-77), 40% (339/850) were female, and 54% (457/850) had at least one positive delirium score. Delirium severity ranges (CAM-ICU-7: 0-7; and ICDSC: 0-8) were positively correlated (Pearson's correlation coefficient, r = 0.83; p < 0.0001). The overall agreement between the CAM-ICU-7 and the ICDSC for delirium measurement (CAM-ICU-7: >2, and ICDSC: >3) was substantial (kappa = 0.74), but the agreement decreased to fair (kappa = 0.38) if a patient had a RASS less than 0. CONCLUSIONS: The agreement between the CAM-ICU-7 and the ICDSC for delirium severity measurement was substantial but might be affected by the patient's sedation and agitation level at the time of assessment. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Both CAM-ICU-7 and ICDSC can be implemented for delirium severity measurement. Attention is warranted in both scores if a patient has a RASS of -2.

Improving patient's intensive care admission through multidisciplinary simulation-based crisis resource management: A qualitative study.

AIM: To explore nurses' and physicians' experiences of simulation-based training in a crisis resource management quality improvement intervention on intensive care admission. BACKGROUND: Quantitative studies have documented that staffs' non-technical skills are improved after simulation-based training in crisis resource management interventions. Experienced-based consensus led to development of a quality improvement intervention based on principles of crisis resource management and tested in simulation-based training to enhance staffs' non-technical skills. However, the impact on staff is unexplored, leaving little understanding of the relationship between simulation-based training in crisis resource management interventions and changes in non-technical skills. DESIGN: A qualitative study with a hermeneutical approach. METHODS: Data consisted of semi-structured interviews with physicians (n = 5) and nurses (n = 15) with maximum variation in work experience. Data were collected 3 months after implementation and analysed using thematic analysis. The COREQ guideline was applied. RESULTS: The analysis revealed three themes: prioritising core clinical activities and patient centredness; transition into practice; and reflection on patient safety. These themes reflected staff's experiences of the intervention and implementation process, which evolved through prioritising core clinical activities that facilitated the transition into clinical practice and staff's reflection on patient safety. CONCLUSIONS: Prioritising core clinical activities were facilitated by clear communication, predefined roles and better teamwork. Transition into practice stimulated professional growth through feedback. Reflection on patient safety created a new understanding on how a new structure of intensive care admission could be implemented. Collectively, this indicated a joint understanding of admissions. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Findings enables health care professionals to understand how the intervention can contribute to improve quality of care in management of intensive care admission. Improving non-technical skills are vital in high-quality admissions, which supported a structured process and a collaborative professional standard of admissions. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: None.

Intensive care unit nurses' perception of three different methods for delirium screening: A survey (DELIS-3).

BACKGROUND: Delirium is common in critically ill patients with detrimental effects in terms of increased morbidity, mortality, costs, and human suffering. Delirium detection and management depends on systematic screening for delirium, which can be challenging to implement in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore how nurses in the intensive care unit perceived the use of Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU), the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit-7 (CAM-ICU-7), and Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) for delirium screening of patients in the intensive care unit. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, electronic-based survey of nurses' perceptions of delirium screening with the three different instruments for delirium screening. Nurses were asked to grade their perception of the usability of the three instruments and how well they were perceived to detect delirium and delirium symptom changes on a 1- to 6-point Likert scale. Open questions about perceived advantages and disadvantages of each instrument were analysed using the framework method. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven of 167 invited nurses completed the survey and rated the CAM-ICU-7 as faster and easier than the ICDSC, which was more nuanced and reflected changes in the patient's delirium better. Despite being rated as the fastest, easiest, and most used, the CAM-ICU provided less information and was considered inferior to the CAM-ICU-7 and ICDSC. Using familiar instruments made delirium screening easier, but being able to grade and nuance the delirium assessment was experienced as important for clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Both the ICDSC and the CAM-ICU-7 were perceived well suited for detection of delirium and reflected changes in delirium intensity. The CAM-ICU was rated as fast and easy but inferior in its ability to grade and nuance the assessment of delirium. Emphasis on clinical meaningfulness and continued education in delirium screening are necessary for adherence to delirium management guidelines.

Intensive care professionals' perspectives on dysphagia management: A focus group study.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired dysphagia has severe consequences for patients including increased morbidity and mortality. Standard operating procedures, however, including systematic evaluation of swallowing function and access to specialised assessment and training may be limited. Dysphagia management relies on multiprofessional collaboration, but practice is variable and nonstandardised. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore and compare nurses', physicians', and occupational therapists' perceptions of dysphagia management in the ICU. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six focus group interviews with 33 participants (23 nurses, four physicians, and six occupational therapists) were conducted and analysed using the framework method with a matrix developed from the first interview. Content from the interviews was plotted into the matrix, condensed, and refined. FINDINGS: Clinical dysphagia management depended on recognising signs of dysphagia in patients at risk. Assessment, therapeutic methods, and care differed among professional groups according to knowledge and roles. Interprofessional collaboration and responsibility for dysphagia management across the care continuum was determined by availability of resources, practical skills, knowledge, and formal decision-making competence and judged effective when based on mutual respect and recognition of healthcare professionals' different perspectives. CONCLUSION: Systematic interprofessional collaboration in ICU dysphagia management requires working towards a common goal of preventing aspiration and rehabilitating the patients' ability to swallow safely. This is based on dysphagia assessment, using appropriate therapeutic interventions, sharing knowledge, and improving skills among professional groups.