Exploring Antipsychotic Use for Delirium Management in Adults in Hospital, Sub-Acute Rehabilitation and Aged Care Settings: A Systematic Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines discourage antipsychotic use for delirium; however, concerns persist about their continued use in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to describe the prevalence and patterns of antipsychotic use in delirium management with regard to best-practice recommendations. Primary outcomes investigated were prevalence of use, antipsychotic type, dosage and clinical indication. METHODS: Eligibility criteria: studies of any design that examined antipsychotic use to manage delirium in adults in critical care, acute care, palliative care, rehabilitation, and aged care were included. Studies of patients in acute psychiatric care, with psychiatric illness or pre-existing antipsychotic use were excluded. INFORMATION SOURCES: we searched five health databases on 16 August, 2023 (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, APA PsycInfo, ProQuest Health and Medical Collection) using MeSH terms and relevant keywords, including 'delirium' and 'antipsychotic'. Risk of bias: as no included studies were randomised controlled trials, all studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: descriptive data were extracted in Covidence and synthesised in Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: Included studies: 39 studies published between March 2004 and August 2023 from 13 countries (n = 1,359,519 patients). Most study designs were retrospective medical record audits (n = 16). SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: in 18 studies, participants' mean age was ≥65 years (77.79, ±5.20). Palliative care had the highest average proportion of patients with delirium managed with antipsychotics (70.87%, ±33.81%); it was lower and varied little between intensive care unit (53.53%, ±19.73%) and non-intensive care unit settings [medical, surgical and any acute care wards] (56.93%, ±26.44%) and was lowest in in-patient rehabilitation (17.8%). Seventeen different antipsychotics were reported on. In patients aged ≥65 years, haloperidol was the most frequently used and at higher than recommended mean daily doses (2.75 mg, ±2.21 mg). Other antipsychotics commonly administered were olanzapine (mean 11 mg, ±8.54 mg), quetiapine (mean 64.23 mg, ±43.20 mg) and risperidone (mean 0.97 mg, ±0.64 mg). CONCLUSIONS: The use of antipsychotics to manage delirium is strongly discouraged in international guidelines. Antipsychotic use in delirium care is a risk for adverse health outcomes and a longer duration of delirium, especially in older people. However, this study has provided evidence that clinicians continue to use antipsychotics for delirium management, the dose, frequency and duration of which are often outside evidence-based guideline recommendations. Clinicians continue to choose antipsychotics to manage delirium symptoms to settle agitation and maintain patient and staff safety, particularly in situations where workload pressures are high. Sustained efforts are needed at the individual, team and organisational levels to educate, train and support clinicians to prioritise non-pharmacological interventions early before deciding to use antipsychotics. This could prevent delirium and avert escalation in behavioural symptoms that often lead to antipsychotic use.

Delirium detection in the emergency department: A diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis of history, physical examination, laboratory tests, and screening instruments.

INTRODUCTION: Geriatric emergency department (ED) guidelines emphasize timely identification of delirium. This article updates previous diagnostic accuracy systematic reviews of history, physical examination, laboratory testing, and ED screening instruments for the diagnosis of delirium as well as test-treatment thresholds for ED delirium screening. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to quantify the diagnostic accuracy of approaches to identify delirium. Studies were included if they described adults aged 60 or older evaluated in the ED setting with an index test for delirium compared with an acceptable criterion standard for delirium. Data were extracted and studies were reviewed for risk of bias. When appropriate, we conducted a meta-analysis and estimated delirium screening thresholds. RESULTS: Full-text review was performed on 55 studies and 27 were included in the current analysis. No studies were identified exploring the accuracy of findings on history or laboratory analysis. While two studies reported clinicians accurately rule in delirium, clinician gestalt is inadequate to rule out delirium. We report meta-analysis on three studies that quantified the accuracy of the 4 A's Test (4AT) to rule in (pooled positive likelihood ratio [LR+] 7.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.7-20.7) and rule out (pooled negative likelihood ratio [LR-] 0.18, 95% CI 0.09-0.34) delirium. We also conducted meta-analysis of two studies that quantified the accuracy of the Abbreviated Mental Test-4 (AMT-4) and found that the pooled LR+ (4.3, 95% CI 2.4-7.8) was lower than that observed for the 4AT, but the pooled LR- (0.22, 95% CI 0.05-1) was similar. Based on one study the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) is the superior instrument to rule in delirium. The calculated test threshold is 2% and the treatment threshold is 11%. CONCLUSIONS: The quantitative accuracy of history and physical examination to identify ED delirium is virtually unexplored. The 4AT has the largest quantity of ED-based research. Other screening instruments may more accurately rule in or rule out delirium. If the goal is to rule in delirium then the CAM-ICU or brief CAM or modified CAM for the ED are superior instruments, although the accuracy of these screening tools are based on single-center studies. To rule out delirium, the Delirium Triage Screen is superior based on one single-center study.

Advance planning for research participation: Time to translate this innovation into practice.

OBJECTIVES: Advance planning for research is a process that involves thinking about, discussing and expressing preferences for taking part in research during future periods of incapacity. The process may include making an advance research directive and naming trusted people to be involved in decisions about research participation. Advance research planning could help to overcome barriers to including people with dementia in research. To encourage innovation in this area, this article presents recommendations informed by a stakeholder workshop that brought together consumer representatives and representatives active in dementia, ageing and health-related research, policy-making, advocacy and service delivery in health and aged care. METHODS: An online workshop where 15 stakeholders shared perspectives and suggestions for implementing advance research planning, with a focus on research involving people with dementia. RESULTS: Raising awareness of advance research planning requires multi-faceted strategies. Training and resources are needed for researchers, ethics committees and organisations regarding this form of advance planning and the use of research directives. Like any form of advance planning, planning ahead for research must be a voluntary, informed and person-centred process. There is a lack of uniform legal rules on research involving people who lack the capacity to consent; however, advance research directives could, in principle, inform decisions about research participation. CONCLUSIONS: As a matter of law, policy and practice, people are encouraged to plan ahead in many areas of their life. Research planning has been relatively neglected, and the recommendations offered here aim to encourage innovation in research and implementation in this area.

Clinical indicators of acute deterioration in persons who reside in residential aged care facilities: A rapid review.

PURPOSE: To identify the clinical indicators of acute deterioration in residents and the factors that influence residential aged care facility staff's identification of these. DESIGN: Rapid review and narrative synthesis. METHODS: The WHO and Cochrane Rapid Review Methods Group recommendations guided the review processes. CINAHL, Medline, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were searched from 2000 to January 2022. Data related to clinical indicators of deterioration were categorized using the Airway, Breathing, Circulation, Disability, Exposure assessment framework, and factors influencing detection were grouped as consumer (resident and family), aged care workforce, and organization factors. RESULTS: Twenty publications were included of which 14 informed clinical indicators; nine highlighted factors that influence staff's identification of these and three informed both. Included article were collectively below moderate quality. Most clinical indicators were grouped into the 'Disability' category with altered level of consciousness, behavior, and pain identified most frequently. Few studies reported more traditional indicators of deterioration used in the general population - changes in vital signs. The most common factors influencing the detection of acute deterioration were organizational and workforce-related including resource, knowledge, and confidence deficits. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest subtle changes in resident's health status, rather than focusing primarily on physiologic parameters used in early warning tools for acute care settings, should be recognized and considered in the design of early warning tools for residential aged care facilities. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Early warning tools sensitive to the unique needs of residents and support for aged care facility staff are recommended to improve the capacity of aged care facility care staff to identify and manage acute deterioration early to avoid hospitalization.

Advocating the rights of people with dementia to contribute to research: Considerations for researchers and ethics committees.

OBJECTIVE: Research involving people with dementia is vital to appropriately inform policy and practice decisions affecting this population. As dementia-care researchers, we frequently advocate to Human Research Ethics Committees for the right of people with dementia to choose whether to participate in research. This brief report provides some considerations for researchers and ethics committees. METHOD: Descriptive summary of principles that argue for inclusion of people with dementia in research studies. RESULTS: Specifically excluding people living with dementia from research because of perceived cognitive impairment is inappropriate in light of human rights principles and the right to contribute to evidence-based care. CONCLUSIONS: There is a difference between capacity to provide informed consent and ability to provide perspectives that are valid for each individual. Providing the opportunity for a person with dementia to participate in research and offering support to do this is a matter of human rights.

Prevention of Delirium in Older Adults With Dementia: A Systematic Literature Review.

Although dementia is the largest independent risk factor for delirium and leads to poor health outcomes, we know little about how to prevent delirium in persons with dementia (PWD). The purpose of the current systematic literature review was to identify interventions designed to prevent delirium in older PWD. Seven studies meeting inclusion criteria were extracted. Five studies were in the acute care setting and two were community settings. One study used a randomized controlled trial design. Five of the seven interventions comprised multiple components addressing delirium risk factors, including education. Two studies addressed delirium by administration of medication or vitamin supplementation. Using the GRADE framework for the evaluation of study quality, we scored three studies as moderate and four studies as low. Thus, high-quality research studies to guide how best to prevent delirium in PWD are lacking. Although more research is required, the current review suggests that multicomponent approaches addressing delirium risk factors should be considered by health care professionals when supporting older PWD. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 46(10), 43-54.].

The effects of therapeutic activity kits in emergency department patients with dementia: Study protocol for a pragmatic randomized control trial.

AIM: To determine the effectiveness of therapeutic activity kits on health service use and treatment delivered in the emergency department (ED) in patients with pre-morbid dementia. DESIGN: Pragmatic randomized control trial with equal parallel groups. METHODS: Participants with dementia will be randomly assigned to the control group (N = 56) or the intervention group (N = 56). The intervention group will be given access to a therapeutic activity kit containing several different activities and sensory stimuli to engage the person with dementia during their ED stay in addition to usual care, and the control group will be given usual care only. A research nurse will observe participants at 30-60-min intervals throughout their ED stay for responsive behaviours, one-on-one nursing, and the use of chemical and physical restraint. This study has received Research Ethics Committee approval from the institutional review board and funding from the Rosemary Bryant Foundation (May 2019). DISCUSSION: Emergency departments are busy and noisy environments and can be intimidating and disorientating for patients with dementia, which can result in responsive behaviours. Responsive behaviours are often managed with restrictive interventions, such as chemical or physical restraint, or with constant bedside nursing (one-on-one nursing) to ensure patient safety. Alternatively, non-restrictive and non-pharmacological interventions that divert or occupy the attention of patients such as those contained in the therapeutic activity kit can be considered as a more person-centred strategy. Therapeutic activity kits have been reported as feasible for the use in ED; however, there is limited quality evidence at present to support the implementation of such interventions in the ED. IMPACT: If this study is successful, it will demonstrate that a therapeutic activity kit containing activities (puzzles, colouring, music, and tactile activities) is inexpensive, easily implemented intervention that can prevent this patient group from demonstrating unsafe behaviours and requiring one-on-one nursing and restraints.

A national survey of aged care facility managers' views of preparedness for natural disasters relevant to residents with dementia.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to explore the natural disaster preparedness strategies of Australian residential aged care facilities (RACFs), focussing on aspects relevant to people with dementia. METHODS: An online survey was sent to 2617 RACF managers, with 416 responding. Questions included the following: (a) demographics; (b) presence and detail level of disaster/evacuation plans; and (c) references to people with dementia. RESULTS: One in four facilities had experienced a natural disaster in the previous five years. The majority had plans for natural disaster and evacuation. Two-thirds recognised the unique needs of people with dementia. Managers anticipated that residents with dementia would require more staff time and resources and might become disoriented. CONCLUSIONS: Gaps identified in existing RACF evacuation plans highlighted challenges in ensuring the ongoing safety and care of residents, especially those with dementia. Facilities need to have adequate plans and processes that minimise the potential risks of natural disasters.

Accuracy of Dementia Screening Instruments in Emergency Medicine: A Diagnostic Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Dementia is underrecognized in older adult emergency department (ED) patients, which threatens operational efficiency, diagnostic accuracy, and patient satisfaction. The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine geriatric ED guidelines advocate dementia screening using validated instruments. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of sufficiently brief screening instruments for dementia in geriatric ED patients. A secondary objective was to define an evidence-based pretest probability of dementia based on published research and then estimate disease thresholds at which dementia screening is most appropriate. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017074855). METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, DARE, and SCOPUS were searched. Studies in which ED patients ages 65 years or older for dementia were included if sufficient details to reconstruct 2 × 2 tables were reported. QUADAS-2 was used to assess study quality with meta-analysis reported if more than one study evaluated the same instrument against the same reference standard. Outcomes were sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-). To identify test and treatment thresholds, we employed the Pauker-Kassirer method. RESULTS: A total of 1,616 publications were identified, of which 16 underwent full text-review; nine studies were included with a weighted average dementia prevalence of 31% (range, 12%-43%). Eight studies used the Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE) as the reference standard and the other study used the MMSE in conjunction with a geriatrician's neurocognitive evaluation. Blinding to the index test and/or reference standard was inadequate in four studies. Eight instruments were evaluated in 2,423 patients across four countries in Europe and North America. The Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT-4) most accurately ruled in dementia (LR+ = 7.69 [95% confidence interval {CI} = 3.45-17.10]) while the Brief Alzheimer's Screen most accurately ruled out dementia (LR- = 0.10 [95% CI = 0.02-0.28]). Using estimates of diagnostic accuracy for AMT-4 from this meta-analysis as one trigger for more comprehensive geriatric vulnerability assessments, ED dementia screening benefits patients when the prescreening probability of dementia is between 14 and 36%. CONCLUSIONS: ED-based diagnostic research for dementia screening is limited to a few studies using an inadequate criterion standard with variable masking of interpreter's access to the index test and the criterion standard. Standardizing the geriatric ED cognitive assessment methods, measures, and nomenclature is necessary to reduce uncertainties about diagnostic accuracy, reliability, and relevance in this acute care setting. The AMT-4 is currently the most accurate ED screening instrument to increase the probability of dementia and the Brief Alzheimer's Screen is the most accurate to decrease the probability of dementia. Dementia screening as one marker of vulnerability to initiate comprehensive geriatric assessment is warranted based on test-treatment threshold calculations.

People with dementia getting lost in Australia: Dementia-related missing person reports in the media.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand the circumstances in which people with dementia become lost, and the outcomes of these incidents. METHODS: A search was conducted of news articles published in Australia between 2011 and 2015 reporting a missing person with a diagnosis of dementia. RESULTS: Over the five-year period, 130 missing person cases were reported. The average age of the missing person was 75 years with more men (74%) than women reported missing. Most missing persons travelled on foot (62%) and were last seen at home (66%). The newspaper reports described 92 (71%) of the individuals being found. Of these, 60% were found well, 20% were found injured, and 20% were deceased. CONCLUSIONS: People with dementia are at risk of becoming lost from their homes or health-care settings, and this can have catastrophic outcomes. Care strategies need to focus on promoting autonomy while ensuring adverse outcomes are minimised.

Characteristics of older people with cognitive impairment attending emergency departments: A descriptive study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to describe the profile of older people with cognitive impairment (CI) presenting to emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: This was a multi-centre (n=8) observational study of a convenience sample of older (≥70y) ED patients (n=579). Participants were prospectively assessed for CI and surveyed for the duration of their ED stay (n=191). A picture of patients' health status and ED responses to care needs was obtained through application of standardised assessment tools. Additionally, observations of care processes in ED were undertaken. Demographic data were collected through both ED's information system and survey. Outcome data were collected 28 days post-ED visit using follow-up telephone interviews. RESULTS: Of 579 older persons, 191 (33%) persons met criteria for CI. The majority of older ED patients with CI in ED lived in the community (157/177, 88.7%), arrived by ambulance (116/172, 67%), were accompanied by a support person (94/149, 63%), were triaged as urgent to semi-urgent (157/191, 82%), and were hospitalised (108/172, 57%). The median ED length of stay was 6h. In ED, 53% of the sample experienced pain (92/173). Older ED patients with CI pose the following characteristics: prior hospital admissions (43/129, 33%), incontinence (61/178, 34%), dependence in activities in daily living (81/190, 43%), issues in nutrition (73/182, 40%), vision and hearing impairment (93% (160/172) and 26% (44/171) respectively). CONCLUSION: Increased understanding of these presenting characteristics and their impacts on patient risk facilitates tailoring the quality of emergency care to better suit the needs and improve outcomes of this increasing ED population.

Structural quality indicators to support quality of care for older people with cognitive impairment in emergency departments.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to identify the structural quality of care domains and to establish a set of structural quality indicators (SQIs) for the assessment of care of older people with cognitive impairment in emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: A structured approach to SQI development was undertaken including: 1) a comprehensive search of peer-reviewed and gray literature focusing on identification of evidence-based interventions targeting structure of care of older patients with cognitive impairment and existing SQIs; 2) a consultative process engaging experts in the care of older people and epidemiologic methods (i.e., advisory panel) leading to development of a draft set of SQIs; 3) field testing of drafted SQIs in eight EDs, leading to refinement of the SQI set; and 4) an independent voting process among the panelists for SQI inclusion in a final set, using preestablished inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULTS: At the conclusion of the process, five SQIs targeting the management of older ED patients with cognitive impairment were developed: 1) the ED has a policy outlining the management of older people with cognitive impairment during the ED episode of care; 2) the ED has a policy outlining issues relevant to carers of older people with cognitive impairment, encompassing the need to include the (family) carer in the ED episode of care; 3) the ED has a policy outlining the assessment and management of behavioral symptoms, with specific reference to older people with cognitive impairment; 4) the ED has a policy outlining delirium prevention strategies, including the assessment of patients' delirium risk factors; and 5) the ED has a policy outlining pain assessment and management for older people with cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: This article presents a set of SQIs for the evaluation of performance in caring for older people with cognitive impairment in EDs.

Process quality indicators targeting cognitive impairment to support quality of care for older people with cognitive impairment in emergency departments.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to develop process quality indicators (PQIs) to support the improvement of care services for older people with cognitive impairment in emergency departments (ED). METHODS: A structured research approach was taken for the development of PQIs for the care of older people with cognitive impairment in EDs, including combining available evidence with expert opinion (phase 1), a field study (phase 2), and formal voting (phase 3). A systematic review of the literature identified ED processes targeting the specific care needs of older people with cognitive impairment. Existing relevant PQIs were also included. By integrating the scientific evidence and clinical expertise, new PQIs were drafted and, along with the existing PQIs, extensively discussed by an advisory panel. These indicators were field tested in eight hospitals using a cohort of older persons aged 70 years and older. After analysis of the field study data (indicator prevalence, variability across sites), in a second meeting, the advisory panel further defined the PQIs. The advisory panel formally voted for selection of those PQIs that were most appropriate for care evaluation. RESULTS: In addition to seven previously published PQIs relevant to the care of older persons, 15 new indicators were created. These 22 PQIs were then field tested. PQIs designed specifically for the older ED population with cognitive impairment were only scored for patients with identified cognitive impairment. Following formal voting, a total of 11 PQIs were included in the set. These PQIs targeted cognitive screening, delirium screening, delirium risk assessment, evaluation of acute change in mental status, delirium etiology, proxy notification, collateral history, involvement of a nominated support person, pain assessment, postdischarge follow-up, and ED length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: This article presents a set of PQIs for the evaluation of the care for older people with cognitive impairment in EDs. The variation in indicator triggering across different ED sites suggests that there are opportunities for quality improvement in care for this vulnerable group. Applied PQIs will identify an emergency services' implementation of care strategies for cognitively impaired older ED patients. Awareness of the PQI triggers at an ED level enables implementation of targeted interventions to improve any suboptimal processes of care. Further validation and utility of the indicators in a wider population is now indicated.

Methodology for developing quality indicators for the care of older people in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Compared with younger people, older people have a higher risk of adverse health outcomes when presenting to emergency departments. As the population ages, older people will make up an increasing proportion of the emergency department population. Therefore it is timely that consideration be given to the quality of care received by older persons in emergency departments, and to consideration of those older people with special needs. Particular attention will be focused on important groups of older people, such as patients with cognitive impairment, residents of long term care and patients with palliative care needs. This project will develop a suite of quality indicators focused on the care of older persons in the emergency department. METHODS/DESIGN: Following input from an expert panel, an initial set of structural, process, and outcome indicators will be developed based on thorough systematic search in the scientific literature. All initial indicators will be tested in eight emergency departments for their validity and feasibility. Results of the data from the field studies will be presented to the expert panel at a second meeting. A suite of Quality Indicators for the older emergency department population will be finalised following a formal voting process. DISCUSSION: The predicted burgeoning in the number of older persons presenting to emergency departments combined with the recognised quality deficiencies in emergency department care delivery to this population, highlight the need for a quality framework for the care of older persons in emergency departments. Additionally, high quality of care is associated with improved survival & health outcomes of elderly patients. The development of well-selected, validated and economical quality indicators will allow appropriate targeting of resources (financial, education or quality management) to improve quality in areas with maximum potential for improvement.

What is the evidence to guide best practice for the management of older people with cognitive impairment presenting to emergency departments? A systematic review.

The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic literature review of research-based studies to identify practices designed to meet the specific care needs of older cognitively impaired patients in emergency departments (ED). A systematic literature review of studies was completed using PRIMSA methodology. The search criteria included articles from both emergency and acute care settings. A total of 944 articles were screened, and a total of 43 articles were identified as eligible. The review found a number of intervention studies to improve quality of care for older persons with cognitive impairment carried out or commenced in emergency settings, including interventions to improve cognitive impairment recognition (n = 9) and clinical approaches to reduce falls (n = 1) and both delirium incidence and prevalence (n = 2). Relevant studies carried out in acute care settings regarding cognitive impairment recognition (n = 4) and primary and secondary prevention of delirium (n = 18) and intervention studies that reduced the prescription of deliriogenic drugs (n = 1), reduced behavioral symptoms and discomfort (n = 7), and improved nutritional intake (n = 1) in hospitalized older persons with dementia were also identified. There is limited research available that reports interventions that improve the quality of care of older ED patients with cognitive impairment. Although this review found evidence obtained from the acute care setting, additional research is needed to identify whether these interventions are beneficial in fast-paced emergency settings.

Appraisal of the quality of care of older adults with cognitive impairment in the emergency department.

The medical records of 273 patients 75 years and older were reviewed to evaluate quality of emergency department (ED) care through the use of quality indicators. One hundred fifty records contained evidence of an attempt to carry out a cognitive assessment. Documented evidence of cognitive impairment (CI) was reported in 54 cases. Of these patients, 30 had no documented evidence of an acute change in cognitive function from baseline; of 26 patients discharged home with preexisting CI (i.e., no acute change from baseline), 15 had no documented evidence of previous consideration of this issue by a health care provider; and 12 of 21 discharged patients who screened positive for cognitive issues for the first time were not referred for outpatient evaluation. These findings suggest that the majority of older adults in the ED are not receiving a formal cognitive assessment, and more than half with CI do not receive quality of care according to the quality indicators for geriatric emergency care. Recommendations for improvement are discussed.