ArticleJournal of palliative medicine2011
Ease of screening for depression and delirium in patients enrolled in inpatient hospice care.
Article in Journal of palliative medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- The incidence and prevalence of delirium across palliative care settings: A systematic review.Palliative medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Geriatric Psychiatrists' Perspectives on Palliative Care: Results From A National Survey.Journal of geriatric psychiatry and neurology · 2024Article
- Assessment of the effects of a multi-component, individualized physiotherapy program in patients receiving hospice services in the home.BMC palliative care · 2020Article
- The Association between Pain and Depression, Anxiety, and Cognitive Function among Advanced Cancer Patients in the Hospice Ward.Korean journal of family medicine · 2013Article
- Clarifying delirium management: practical, evidenced-based, expert recommendations for clinical practice.Journal of palliative medicine · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMajor depression and delirium are prevalent, underrecognized, and undertreated in hospice and palliative care settings. Furthermore, they are both associated with significant morbidity and mortality.
objectiveA screening study of patients receiving inpatient hospice care was conducted in order to determine the ease of screening for depression and delirium in patients with advanced, life-threatening illnesses by hospice social workers and nurses, respectively.
methodsA two-question depression screening tool was administered to 20 consecutive patients on admission to a hospice general inpatient care center by social work staff during their initial assessment. A delirium-screening tool was administered daily to 22 consecutive patients admitted to the ICC daily by nursing staff. Screening results were collected, as were patient and staff feelings about the burden of the screening process.
resultsOf the 20 patients screened on admission for depression by social work, 70% (14/20) screened positive. Of the 22 patients screened daily for delirium by nursing, 64% (14/22) screened positive at least once during their admission. Screening for both conditions was considered relatively easy to accomplish by the hospice staff. There were no significant associations between a positive screen of depression or delirium and patient gender, age, ethnicity, terminal diagnosis, or marital status. DISCUSSION: These results support the notion that depression and delirium are very common in hospice inpatients, and that screening for both is relatively easy and practical for hospice clinicians to conduct.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.