16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Outcomes of a Delirium Prevention Program in Older Persons After Elective Surgery : A Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          Does a multimodal nonpharmacological approach prevent delirium in older patients undergoing elective surgical procedures?

          Findings

          This stepped-wedge cluster trial recruited 1470 patients 70 years and older who were randomized in 5 clusters to patient-centered evidence-based intervention (ie, personalized stimulation, company, relaxation) vs routine care. The intervention reduced delirium incidence after various major procedures, most significantly in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery; the intervention did not change cardiac surgery postoperative delirium incidence.

          Meaning

          Results of this stepped-wedge cluster trial suggest the implementation of this multimodal nonpharmacological delirium prevention program may improve delivery of targeted care and patient outcomes in older patients undergoing elective noncardiac surgical procedures.

          Abstract

          This stepped-wedge cluster randomized clinical trial examines whether a multifaceted prevention intervention is effective in reducing postoperative delirium incidence and prevalence among older patients after various major surgical procedures.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Delirium significantly worsens elective surgery outcomes and costs. Delirium risk is highest in elderly populations, whose surgical health care resource consumption (50%) exceeds their demographic proportion (15% to 18%) in high-resource countries. Effective nonpharmacologic delirium prevention could safely improve care in these vulnerable patients, but data from procedure-specific studies are insufficiently compelling to drive changes in practice. Delirium prevention approaches applicable to different surgical settings remain unexplored.

          Objective

          To examine whether a multifaceted prevention intervention is effective in reducing postoperative delirium incidence and prevalence after various major surgical procedures.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          This stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial recruited 1470 patients 70 years and older undergoing elective orthopedic, general, or cardiac surgery from November 2017 to April 2019 from 5 German tertiary medical centers. Data were analyzed from December 2019 to July 2021.

          Interventions

          First, structured delirium education was provided to clinical caregivers at each site. Then, the study delirium prevention team assessed patient delirium risk factors and symptoms daily. Prevention was tailored to individual patient needs and could include: cognitive, motor, and sensory stimulation; meal companionship; accompaniment during diagnostic procedures; stress relaxation; and sleep promotion.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          Postoperative delirium incidence and duration.

          Results

          Of 1470 included patients, 763 (51.9%) were male, and the median (IQR) age was 77 (74-81) years. Overall, the intervention reduced postoperative delirium incidence (odds ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.98; P = .02) and percentage of days with delirium (intervention, 5.3%; control, 6.9%; P = .03). The effect was significant in patients undergoing orthopedic or abdominal surgery (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.35-0.99; P = .047) but not cardiac surgery (odds ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.70-1.99; P = .54).

          Conclusions and Relevance

          This multifaceted multidisciplinary prevention intervention reduced postoperative delirium occurrence and days with delirium in older patients undergoing different elective surgical procedures but not cardiac procedures. These results suggest implementing this delirium prevention program will improve care and outcomes in older patients undergoing elective general and orthopedic procedures.

          Related collections

          Most cited references72

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation

          The objective of this study was to develop a prospectively applicable method for classifying comorbid conditions which might alter the risk of mortality for use in longitudinal studies. A weighted index that takes into account the number and the seriousness of comorbid disease was developed in a cohort of 559 medical patients. The 1-yr mortality rates for the different scores were: "0", 12% (181); "1-2", 26% (225); "3-4", 52% (71); and "greater than or equal to 5", 85% (82). The index was tested for its ability to predict risk of death from comorbid disease in the second cohort of 685 patients during a 10-yr follow-up. The percent of patients who died of comorbid disease for the different scores were: "0", 8% (588); "1", 25% (54); "2", 48% (25); "greater than or equal to 3", 59% (18). With each increased level of the comorbidity index, there were stepwise increases in the cumulative mortality attributable to comorbid disease (log rank chi 2 = 165; p less than 0.0001). In this longer follow-up, age was also a predictor of mortality (p less than 0.001). The new index performed similarly to a previous system devised by Kaplan and Feinstein. The method of classifying comorbidity provides a simple, readily applicable and valid method of estimating risk of death from comorbid disease for use in longitudinal studies. Further work in larger populations is still required to refine the approach because the number of patients with any given condition in this study was relatively small.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment.

            To develop a 10-minute cognitive screening tool (Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA) to assist first-line physicians in detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a clinical state that often progresses to dementia. Validation study. A community clinic and an academic center. Ninety-four patients meeting MCI clinical criteria supported by psychometric measures, 93 patients with mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) (Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score > or =17), and 90 healthy elderly controls (NC). The MoCA and MMSE were administered to all participants, and sensitivity and specificity of both measures were assessed for detection of MCI and mild AD. Using a cutoff score 26, the MMSE had a sensitivity of 18% to detect MCI, whereas the MoCA detected 90% of MCI subjects. In the mild AD group, the MMSE had a sensitivity of 78%, whereas the MoCA detected 100%. Specificity was excellent for both MMSE and MoCA (100% and 87%, respectively). MCI as an entity is evolving and somewhat controversial. The MoCA is a brief cognitive screening tool with high sensitivity and specificity for detecting MCI as currently conceptualized in patients performing in the normal range on the MMSE.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people.

              There is no single generally accepted clinical definition of frailty. Previously developed tools to assess frailty that have been shown to be predictive of death or need for entry into an institutional facility have not gained acceptance among practising clinicians. We aimed to develop a tool that would be both predictive and easy to use. We developed the 7-point Clinical Frailty Scale and applied it and other established tools that measure frailty to 2305 elderly patients who participated in the second stage of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA). We followed this cohort prospectively; after 5 years, we determined the ability of the Clinical Frailty Scale to predict death or need for institutional care, and correlated the results with those obtained from other established tools. The CSHA Clinical Frailty Scale was highly correlated (r = 0.80) with the Frailty Index. Each 1-category increment of our scale significantly increased the medium-term risks of death (21.2% within about 70 mo, 95% confidence interval [CI] 12.5%-30.6%) and entry into an institution (23.9%, 95% CI 8.8%-41.2%) in multivariable models that adjusted for age, sex and education. Analyses of receiver operating characteristic curves showed that our Clinical Frailty Scale performed better than measures of cognition, function or comorbidity in assessing risk for death (area under the curve 0.77 for 18-month and 0.70 for 70-month mortality). Frailty is a valid and clinically important construct that is recognizable by physicians. Clinical judgments about frailty can yield useful predictive information.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Surg
                JAMA Surg
                JAMA Surgery
                American Medical Association
                2168-6254
                2168-6262
                15 December 2021
                February 2022
                15 December 2021
                : 157
                : 2
                : e216370
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
                [2 ]Social and Preventive Medicine, Department of Sports and Health Sciences, Intrafaculty Unit of Cognitive Sciences, Faculty of Human Science, and Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Research Area Services Research and e-Health, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
                [3 ]Agaplesion Bethesda Clinic Ulm, Institute for Geriatric Research, Ulm University, Geriatric Center Ulm, Ulm, Germany
                [4 ]Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
                [5 ]Department of Geriatric Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
                [6 ]Division of Geriatrics, University Medical Center Goettingen, Göttingen, Germany
                [7 ]Department of Neurology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
                [8 ]Helios Clinic for Cardiac Surgery Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Germany
                [9 ]Geriatric Center Karlsruhe, ViDia Christian Clinics Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Germany
                [10 ]Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, Medical Center University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
                [11 ]Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
                [12 ]Geriatric Center at the University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
                [13 ]Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Group Information: The members of the PAWEL Study Group appear at the end of the article.
                Accepted for Publication: October 5, 2021.
                Published Online: December 15, 2021. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2021.6370
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2021 Deeken F et al. JAMA Surgery.
                Corresponding Author: Christine Thomas, MD, Department of Geriatric Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Klinikum Stuttgart, Krankenhaus Bad Cannstatt, Priessnitzweg 24, 70374 Stuttgart, Germany ( c.thomas@ 123456klinikum-stuttgart.de ).
                Author Contributions: Dr Thomas had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Ms Deeken and Dr Sánchez contributed equally to this work.
                Study concept and design: Rapp, Spank, von Arnim, Eschweiler, Thomas.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Deeken, Sánchez, Rapp, Denkinger, Brefka, Bruns, von Arnim, Küster, Conzelmann, Metz, Maurer, Skrobik, Forkavets, Thomas.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Deeken, Sánchez, Rapp, Skrobik, Thomas.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
                Statistical analysis: Deeken, Sánchez, Rapp, Maurer, Forkavets.
                Obtained funding: Rapp, Metz, Eschweiler, Thomas.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Deeken, Sánchez, Denkinger, Spank, Bruns, von Arnim, Conzelmann, Maurer, Eschweiler, Thomas.
                Study supervision: Rapp, Denkinger, von Arnim, Skrobik, Eschweiler, Thomas.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Rapp has received grants from the German Research Foundation and German Ministry for Education and Research as well as personal fees from Arbuma GmbH, Philipps Healthcare GmbH, Deutschlandfunk (National Radio Station), Quakenbrück Hospital; and serves as president of the German Society for Geriatric Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. Dr von Arnim has received personal fees from Roche GmbH, Lilly GmbH, Daiichi Sankyo, Dr Willmar Schwabe GmbH, and Biogen and has received research support from Roche Diagnostics AG. Dr Conzelmann has received an award from the German Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery as well as personal fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Thomas has received grants from Robert-Bosch-Stiftung and personal fees from Roche GmbH. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: This work was supported by grant VF1_2016-201 from the Innovationsfonds (fund of the Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss).
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                The PAWEL Study Group: The PAWEL Study Group members are listed in Supplement 3.
                Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 4.
                Article
                soi210098
                10.1001/jamasurg.2021.6370
                8674802
                34910080
                1e865d5b-93ea-4dea-afd0-edf09f219a35
                Copyright 2021 Deeken F et al. JAMA Surgery.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 18 February 2021
                : 5 October 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: Innovationsfonds
                Funded by: Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss
                Categories
                Research
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Featured
                Online First
                Online Only

                Comments

                Comment on this article