Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A systematic review of studies reporting on neuropsychological and functional domains used for assessment of recovery from delirium in acute hospital patients.
McCartney, Haruno; Noble, Erin; MacLullich, Alasdair M J; Davis, Daniel H J; Evans, Jonathan; Shenkin, Susan D; Muniz-Terrera, Graciela; Sandeman, Daisy; Tieges, Zoë.
Affiliation
  • McCartney H; Edinburgh Delirium Research Group, Ageing and Health, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
  • Noble E; Edinburgh Delirium Research Group, Ageing and Health, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
  • MacLullich AMJ; Edinburgh Delirium Research Group, Ageing and Health, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
  • Davis DHJ; MRC Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing, University College London, London, UK.
  • Evans J; School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
  • Shenkin SD; Edinburgh Delirium Research Group, Ageing and Health, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
  • Muniz-Terrera G; Advanced Care Research Centre, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
  • Sandeman D; Edinburgh Dementia Prevention and Division of Psychiatry, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
  • Tieges Z; Department of Social Medicine, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, USA.
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry ; 38(6): e5943, 2023 Jun.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37294207
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

Assessing for recovery in delirium is essential in guiding ongoing investigation and treatment. Yet, there is little scrutiny and no research or clinical consensus on how recovery should be measured. We reviewed studies which used tests of neuropsychological domains and functional ability to track recovery of delirium longitudinally in acute hospital settings. METHODS/

DESIGN:

We systematically searched databases (MEDLINE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), from inception to October 14th , 2022. Inclusion criteria were adult acute hospital patients (≥18 years) diagnosed with delirium by a validated tool; 1+ repeat assessment using an assessment tool measuring domains of delirium/functional recovery ≤7 days from baseline. Two reviewers independently screened articles, performed data extraction, and assessed risk of bias. A narrative data synthesis was completed.

RESULTS:

From 6533 screened citations, we included 39 papers (reporting 32 studies), with 2370 participants with delirium. Studies reported 21 tools with an average of four repeat assessments including baseline (range 2-10 assessments within ≤7 days), measuring 15 specific domains. General cognition, functional ability, arousal, attention and psychotic features were most commonly assessed for longitudinal change. Risk of bias was moderate to high for most studies.

CONCLUSIONS:

There was no standard approach for tracking change in specific domains of delirium. The methodological heterogeneity of studies was too high to draw firm conclusions on the effectiveness of assessment tools to measure delirium recovery. This highlights the need for standardised methods for assessing recovery from delirium.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Activities of Daily Living / Delirium Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Journal subject: GERIATRIA / PSIQUIATRIA Year: 2023 Type: Article Affiliation country: United kingdom

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Activities of Daily Living / Delirium Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Journal subject: GERIATRIA / PSIQUIATRIA Year: 2023 Type: Article Affiliation country: United kingdom