BACKGROUND There are conflicting data on the effects of antipsychotic medications on delirium in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned patients with acute respiratory failure or shock and hypoactive or hyperactive delirium to receive intravenous boluses of haloperidol (maximum dose, 20 mg daily), ziprasidone (maximum dose, 40 mg daily), or placebo. The volume and dose of a trial drug or placebo was halved or doubled at 12-hour intervals on the basis of the presence or absence of delirium, as detected with the use of the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU, and of side effects of the intervention. The primary end point was the number of days alive without delirium or coma during the 14-day intervention period. Secondary end points included 30-day and 90-day survival, time to freedom from mechanical ventilation, and time to ICU and hospital discharge. Safety end points included extrapyramidal symptoms and excessive sedation. RESULTS Written informed consent was obtained from 1183 patients or their authorized representatives. Delirium developed in 566 patients (48%), of whom 89% had hypoactive delirium and 11% had hyperactive delirium. Of the 566 patients, 184 were randomly assigned to receive placebo, 192 to receive haloperidol, and 190 to receive ziprasidone. The median duration of exposure to a trial drug or placebo was 4 days (interquartile range, 3 to 7). The median number of days alive without delirium or coma was 8.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.6 to 9.9) in the placebo group, 7.9 (95% CI, 4.4 to 9.6) in the haloperidol group, and 8.7 (95% CI, 5.9 to 10.0) in the ziprasidone group (P=0.26 for overall effect across trial groups). The use of haloperidol or ziprasidone, as compared with placebo, had no significant effect on the primary end point (odds ratios, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.64 to 1.21] and 1.04 [95% CI, 0.73 to 1.48], respectively). There were no significant between-group differences with respect to the secondary end points or the frequency of extrapyramidal symptoms. CONCLUSIONS The use of haloperidol or ziprasidone, as compared with placebo, in patients with acute respiratory failure or shock and hypoactive or hyperactive delirium in the ICU did not significantly alter the duration of delirium. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and the VA Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center; MIND-USA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01211522.)
National Institutes of Health and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
PURPOSE Cognitive impairment after critical illness is common and debilitating. We developed a cognitive therapy program for critically ill patients and assessed the feasibility and safety of administering combined cognitive and physical therapy early during a critical illness. METHODS We randomized 87 medical and surgical ICU patients with respiratory failure and/or shock in a 1:1:2 manner to three groups: usual care, early once-daily physical therapy, or early once-daily physical therapy plus a novel, progressive, twice-daily cognitive therapy protocol. Cognitive therapy included orientation, memory, attention, and problem solving exercises, and other activities. We assessed feasibility outcomes of the early cognitive plus physical therapy intervention. At 3-months, we also assessed cognitive, functional and health-related quality of life outcomes. Data are presented as median [interquartile range] or frequency (%). RESULTS Early cognitive therapy was a delivered to 41/43 (95%) of cognitive plus physical therapy patients on 100% [92–100%] of study days beginning 1.0 [1.0–1.0] day following enrollment. Physical therapy was received by 17/22 (77%) of usual care patients, by 21/22 (95%) of physical therapy only patients and 42/43 (98%) of cognitive plus physical therapy patients on 17% [10–26%], 67% [46–87%] and 75% [59–88%] of study days, respectively. Cognitive, functional and health-related quality of life outcomes did not differ between groups at 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS This pilot study demonstrates that early rehabilitation can be extended beyond physical therapy to include cognitive therapy. Future work to determine optimal patient selection, intensity of treatment and benefits of cognitive therapy in the critically ill is needed.
Objective To review delirium screening tools available for use in the adult and pediatric ICU, review evidence-based delirium screening implementation and to discuss common pitfalls encountered during delirium screening in the ICU. Data Sources Review of delirium screening literature and expert opinion. Results Over the past decade, tools specifically designed for use in critically ill adults and children have been developed and validated. Delirium screening has been effectively implemented across many ICUs settings. Keys to effective implementation include addressing barriers to routine screening, multi-faceted training such as lectures, case-based scenarios, one-on-one teaching and real-time feedback of delirium screening and interdisciplinary communication through discussion of a patient’s delirium status during bedside rounds and through documentation systems. If delirium is present clinicians should search for reversible or treatable causes since it is often multifactorial. Conclusion Implementation of effective delirium screening is feasible but requires attention to implementation methods, including a change in the current ICU culture that believes delirium is inevitable or a normal part of a critical illness, to a future culture that views delirium as a dangerous syndrome which portends poor clinical outcomes and which is potentially modifiable depending on the individual patients circumstances.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.