Search

Context: Delirium occurs in many hospitalized older patients and has serious consequences including increased risk for death and admission to long-term care. Despite its importance, health care clinicians often fail to recognize delirium. Simple bedside instruments may lead to improved identification.Objective: To systematically review the evidence on the accuracy of bedside instruments in diagnosing the presence of delirium in adults.Data Sources: Search of MEDLINE (from 1950 to May 2010), EMBASE (from 1980 to May 2010), and references of retrieved articles to identify studies of delirium among inpatients.Study Selection: Prospective studies of diagnostic accuracy that compared at least 1 delirium bedside instrument to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-based diagnosis made by a geriatrician, psychiatrist, or neurologist.Data Synthesis: There were 6570 unique citations identified with 25 prospectively conducted studies (N = 3027 patients) meeting inclusion criteria and describing use of 11 instruments. Positive results that suggested delirium with likelihood ratios (LRs) greater than 5.0 were present for the Global Attentiveness Rating (GAR), Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98 (DRS-R-98), Clinical Assessment of Confusion (CAC), and Delirium Observation Screening Scale (DOSS). Normal results that decreased the likelihood of delirium with LRs less than 0.2 were calculated for the GAR, MDAS, CAM, DRS-R-98, Delirium Rating Scale (DRS), DOSS, Nursing Delirium Screening Scale (Nu-DESC), and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). The Digit Span test and Vigilance "A" test in isolation have limited utility in diagnosing delirium. Considering the instrument's ease of use, test performance, and clinical importance of the heterogeneity in the confidence intervals (CIs) of the LRs, the CAM has the best available supportive data as a bedside delirium instrument (summary-positive LR, 9.6; 95% CI, 5.8-16.0; summary-negative LR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.09-0.29). Of all scales, the MMSE (score <24) was the least useful for identifying a patient with delirium (LR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.0).Conclusion: The choice of instrument may be dictated by the amount of time available and the discipline of the examiner; however, the best evidence supports use of the CAM, which takes 5 minutes to administer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Older adults, especially those with frailty, have a higher risk for complications and death after emergency surgery. Acute Care for the Elderly models have been successful in medical wards, but little evidence is available for patients in surgical wards., Objectives: To develop and assess the effect of an Elder-Friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment (EASE) model in an emergency surgical setting., Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, nonrandomized, controlled before-and-after study included patients 65 years or older who presented to the emergency general surgery service of 2 tertiary care hospitals in Alberta, Canada. Transfers from other medical services, patients undergoing elective surgery or with trauma, and nursing home residents were excluded. Of 6795 patients screened, a total of 684 (544 in the nonintervention group and 140 in the intervention group) were included. Data were collected from April 14, 2014, to March 28, 2017, and analyzed from November 16, 2018, through May 30, 2019., Interventions: Integration of a geriatric assessment team, optimization of evidence-based elder-friendly practices, promotion of patient-oriented rehabilitation, and early discharge planning., Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of participants experiencing a major complication or death (composite) in the hospital, Comprehensive Complication Index, length of hospital stay, and proportion of participants who required an alternative level of care on discharge. Covariate-adjusted, within-site change scores were computed, and the overall between-site, preintervention-postintervention difference-in-differences (DID) were analyzed., Results: A total of 684 patients were included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 76.0 [7.6] years; 327 women [47.8%] and 357 men [52.2%]), of whom 139 (20.3%) were frail. At the intervention site, in-hospital major complications or death decreased by 19% (51 of 153 [33.3%] vs 19 of 140 [13.6%]; P < .001; DID P = .06), and mean (SE) Comprehensive Complication Index decreased by 12.2 (2.5) points (P < .001; DID P < .001). Median length of stay decreased by 3 days (10 [interquartile range (IQR), 6-17] days to 7 [IQR, 5-14] days; P = .001; DID P = .61), and fewer patients required an alternative level of care at discharge (61 of 153 [39.9%] vs 29 of 140 [20.7%]; P < .001; DID P = .11)., Conclusions and Relevance: To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine clinical outcomes associated with a novel elder-friendly surgical care delivery redesign. The findings suggest the clinical effectiveness of such an approach by reducing major complications or death, decreasing hospital stays, and returning patients to their home residence., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02233153.

Importance: The Elder-Friendly Approaches to the Surgical Environment (EASE) initiative is a novel approach to acute surgical care for elderly patients., Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of EASE., Design, Setting, and Participants: An economic evaluation from the perspective of the health care system was conducted as part of the controlled before-and-after EASE study at 2 tertiary care centers, the University of Alberta Hospital and Foothills Medical Centre. Participants included elderly adults (aged ≥65 years) admitted for emergency abdominal surgery between 2014 and 2017. Data were analyzed from April 2018 to February 2019., Main Outcomes and Measures: Data were captured at both control and intervention sites before and after implementation of the EASE intervention. Resource use was captured over 6 months of follow-up and was converted to costs. Utility was measured with the EuroQol Five-Dimensions Three-Levels instrument at 6 weeks and 6 months of follow-up. The differences-in-differences method was used to estimate the association of the intervention with cost and quality-adjusted life-years. For a subset of participants, self-reported out-of-pocket health care costs were collected using the Resource Use Inventory at 6 months., Results: A total of 675 participants were included (mean [SD] age, 75.3 [7.9] years; 333 women [49.3%]), 289 in the intervention group and 386 in the control group. The mean (SD) cost per control participant was $36 995 ($44 169) before EASE and $35 032 ($43 611) after EASE (all costs are shown in 2018 Canadian dollars). The mean (SD) cost per intervention participant was $56 143 ($74 039) before EASE and $39 001 ($59 854) after EASE. Controlling for age, sex, and Clinical Frailty Score, the EASE intervention was associated with a mean (SE) cost reduction of 23.5% (12.5%) (P = .02). The change in quality-adjusted life-years observed associated with the intervention was not statistically significant (mean [SE], 0.00001 [0.0001] quality-adjusted life-year; P = .72). The Resource Use Inventory was collected for 331 participants. The mean (SE) odds ratio for having 0 out-of-pocket expenses because of the intervention, compared with having expenses greater than 0, was 15.77 (3.37) (P = .02). Among participants with Resource Use Inventory costs greater than 0, EASE was not associated with a change in spending (mean [SE] reduction associated with EASE, 19.1% [45.2%]; P = .57)., Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that the EASE intervention was associated with a reduction in costs and no change in quality-adjusted life-years. In locations that lack capacity to implement this intervention, costs to increase capacity should be weighed against the estimated costs avoided.

Importance: Falls result in substantial burden for patients and health care systems, and given the aging of the population worldwide, the incidence of falls continues to rise., Objective: To assess the potential effectiveness of interventions for preventing falls., Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Ageline databases from inception until April 2017. Reference lists of included studies were scanned., Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of fall-prevention interventions for participants aged 65 years and older., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Pairs of reviewers independently screened the studies, abstracted data, and appraised risk of bias. Pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were conducted., Main Outcomes and Measures: Injurious falls and fall-related hospitalizations., Results: A total of 283 RCTs (159 910 participants; mean age, 78.1 years; 74% women) were included after screening of 10 650 titles and abstracts and 1210 full-text articles. Network meta-analysis (including 54 RCTs, 41 596 participants, 39 interventions plus usual care) suggested that the following interventions, when compared with usual care, were associated with reductions in injurious falls: exercise (odds ratio [OR], 0.51 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.79]; absolute risk difference [ARD], -0.67 [95% CI, -1.10 to -0.24]); combined exercise and vision assessment and treatment (OR, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.38]; ARD, -1.79 [95% CI, -2.63 to -0.96]); combined exercise, vision assessment and treatment, and environmental assessment and modification (OR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.13 to 0.70]; ARD, -1.19 [95% CI, -2.04 to -0.35]); and combined clinic-level quality improvement strategies (eg, case management), multifactorial assessment and treatment (eg, comprehensive geriatric assessment), calcium supplementation, and vitamin D supplementation (OR, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.55]; ARD, -2.08 [95% CI, -3.56 to -0.60]). Pairwise meta-analyses for fall-related hospitalizations (2 RCTs; 516 participants) showed no significant association between combined clinic- and patient-level quality improvement strategies and multifactorial assessment and treatment relative to usual care (OR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.33 to 1.81])., Conclusions and Relevance: Exercise alone and various combinations of interventions were associated with lower risk of injurious falls compared with usual care. Choice of fall-prevention intervention may depend on patient and caregiver values and preferences.

Context: Pleural effusion is a common finding among patients presenting with respiratory symptoms. The value of the bedside examination to detect pleural effusion is unclear., Objective: To systematically review the evidence regarding the accuracy of the physical examination in assessing the probability of a pleural effusion., Data Sources: We searched MEDLINE (1950-October 2008) and EMBASE (1980-October 2008) using Ovid to identify English-language studies conducted in a clinical setting. Additional studies were identified by searching the bibliographies of retrieved articles and contacting experts in the field., Study Selection: We included prospective studies of diagnostic accuracy that compared at least 1 physical examination maneuver with radiographic confirmation of pleural effusion., Data Extraction: Three authors independently appraised study quality and extracted relevant data. Data regarding participant recruitment, reference standard, diagnostic test(s), and test accuracy were extracted. Disagreements were resolved by consensus., Data Synthesis: We identified 310 unique citations, but only 5 prospectively conducted studies met inclusion criteria (N = 934 patients). A random-effects model was used for quantitative synthesis. Of the 8 physical examination maneuvers evaluated in the included studies (conventional percussion, auscultatory percussion, breath sounds, chest expansion, tactile vocal fremitus, vocal resonance, crackles, and pleural friction rub), dullness to conventional percussion was most accurate for diagnosing pleural effusion (summary positive likelihood ratio, 8.7; 95% confidence interval, 2.2-33.8), while the absence of reduced tactile vocal fremitus made pleural effusion less likely (negative likelihood ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.37)., Conclusions: Based on the limited number of studies, dullness to percussion and tactile fremitus are the most useful findings for pleural effusion. Dull chest percussion makes the probability of a pleural effusion much more likely but requires a chest radiograph to confirm the diagnosis. When the pretest probability of pleural effusion is low, the absence of reduced tactile vocal fremitus makes pleural effusion less likely so that a chest radiograph might not be necessary depending on the overall clinical situation.

Context: Abdominal paracenteses are performed in patients with ascites, most commonly to assess for infection or portal hypertension and to manage refractory ascites., Objectives: To systematically review evidence for paracentesis methods that may decrease risk of adverse events or improve diagnostic yield and to determine the accuracy of ascitic fluid analysis for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis or portal hypertension., Data Sources: Relevant English-language studies from Medline (1966-April 2007) and EMBASE (1980-April 2007)., Study Selection: Paracentesis studies evaluating interventions (use of preprocedure coagulation parameters, needle type, insertion location, ultrasound guidance, bedside inoculation into blood culture bottles, and use of plasma expanders in therapeutic taps) for reducing adverse events or improving the diagnostic yield, and studies assessing the accuracy of ascitic fluid biochemical analyses for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis or portal hypertension., Data Extraction: For technique studies, data on intervention and outcome; and for diagnostic studies, data on parameters for diagnosing spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and portal hypertension (ie, ascitic fluid white blood cell and polymorphonuclear leukocyte [PMN] count, ascitic fluid pH, blood-ascitic fluid pH gradient, and serum-ascites albumin gradient)., Data Synthesis: Thirty-seven studies met inclusion criteria: 2 showed that obtaining preprocedure coagulation was likely unnecessary prior to paracentesis; 1 showed the 15-gauge, 3.25-inch needle-cannula results in less multiple peritoneal punctures [P = .05] and termination due to poor fluid return [P = .02] vs a 14-gauge needle in therapeutic paracentesis; 1 showed immediate inoculation of culture bottles improves diagnostic yield vs delayed (from 77% to 100% [95% CI for the difference, 5.3%-40.0%]); 9 evaluated therapeutic paracentesis, performed with or without albumin or nonalbumin plasma expanders, and found no consistent effect on morbidity or mortality; 16 showed the accuracy of biochemical analysis of ascitic fluid in patients suspected of having spontaneous bacterial peritonitis to increase the likelihood of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (PMN count >250 cells/microL [summary likelihood ratio {LR}, 6.4] 95% CI, 4.6-8.8; ascitic fluid leukocyte count >1000 cells/microL [summary LR, 9.1] 95% CI, 5.5-15.1; pH < 7.35 [summary LR, 9.0] 95% CI, 2.0-40.6; or a blood-ascitic fluid pH gradient > or = 0.10 [LR, 11.3] 95% CI, 4.3-29.9) and other levels lowered the likelihood (PMN count < or = 250 cells/microL [summary LR, 0.2] 95% CI, 0.11-0.37; or a blood-ascitic fluid pH gradient < 0.10 [summary LR, 0.12] 95% CI, 0.02-0.77); and 4 showed the diagnostic accuracy of the serum-ascites albumin gradient lowers the likelihood of portal hypertension (< 1.1 g/dL [summary LR, 0.06] 95% CI, 0.02-0.20)., Conclusions: Ascitic fluid should be inoculated into blood culture bottles at the bedside. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is more likely at predescribed parameters of ascitic PMN count or blood-ascitic fluid pH, and portal hypertension is less likely below a predescribed serum-ascites albumin gradient.

Context: Diagnostic lumbar punctures (LPs), commonly used to rule out meningitis, are associated with adverse events., Objective: To systematically review the evidence about diagnostic LP techniques that may decrease the risk of adverse events and the evidence about test accuracy of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis in adult patients with suspected bacterial meningitis., Data Sources: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (using Ovid and PubMed) from 1966 to January 2006 and EMBASE from 1980 to January 2006 without language restrictions to identify relevant studies and identified others from the bibliographies of retrieved articles., Study Selection: We included randomized trials of patients aged 18 years or older undergoing interventions to facilitate a successful diagnostic LP or to potentially reduce adverse events. Studies assessing the accuracy of biochemical analysis of the CSF for possible bacterial meningitis were also identified., Data Extraction: Two investigators independently appraised study quality and extracted relevant data. For studies of the LP technique, data on the intervention and the outcome were extracted. For studies of the laboratory diagnosis of bacterial meningitis, data on the reference standard and test accuracy were extracted., Data Synthesis: We found 15 randomized trials. A random-effects model was used for quantitative synthesis. Five studies of 587 patients compared atraumatic needles with standard needles and found a nonsignificant decrease in the odds of headache with an atraumatic needle (absolute risk reduction [ARR], 12.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.72% to 26.2%). Reinsertion of the stylet before needle removal decreased the risk of headache (ARR, 11.3%; 95% CI, 6.50%-16.2%). The combined results from 4 studies of 717 patients showed a nonsignificant decrease in headache in patients who were mobilized after LP (ARR, 2.9%; 95% CI, -3.4 to 9.3%). Four studies on the accuracy of biochemical analysis of CSF in patients with suspected meningitis met inclusion criteria. A CSF-blood glucose ratio of 0.4 or less (likelihood ratio [LR], 18; 95% CI, 12-27]), CSF white blood cell count of 500/muL or higher (LR, 15; 95% CI, 10-22), and CSF lactate level of 31.53 mg/dL or more (> or =3.5 mmol/L; LR, 21; 95% CI, 14-32) accurately diagnosed bacterial meningitis., Conclusions: These data suggest that small-gauge, atraumatic needles may decrease the risk of headache after diagnostic LP. Reinsertion of the stylet before needle removal should occur and patients do not require bed rest after the procedure. Future research should focus on evaluating interventions to optimize the success of a diagnostic LP and to enhance training in procedural skills.