Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23152226›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Drug therapy for delirium in terminally ill adult patients.

Bridget Candy, Kenneth C Jackson, Louise Jones, Baptiste Leurent, Adrian Tookman, Michael King

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Drug therapy for delirium in terminally ill adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Off-Label Medication Use in the Inpatient Palliative Care Unit.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2017
    Observational
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Neuroleptics in the management of delirium in patients with advanced cancer.Current opinion in supportive and palliative care · 2016
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Bridget CandyMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Unit, UCL Mental Health Sciences Unit, University College Medical School, London, UK. b.candy@ucl.ac.uk
Kenneth C Jackson
Louise Jones
Baptiste Leurent
Adrian Tookman
Michael King
University College London · GBMarie Curie · GBUniversity of Charleston · US

Funding

Marie Curie MCCC-FCO-11-U
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDelirium is a syndrome characterised by a disturbance of consciousness (often fluctuating), cognition and perception. In terminally ill patients it is one of the most common causes of admission to clinical care. Delirium may arise from any number of causes and treatment should be directed at addressing these causes rather than the symptom cluster. In cases where this is not possible, or treatment does not prove successful, the use of drug therapy to manage the symptoms may become necessary. This is an update of the review published on 'Drug therapy for delirium in terminally ill adult patients' in The Cochrane Library 2004, Issue 2 ( Jackson 2004).

objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness of drug therapies to treat delirium in adult patients in the terminal phase of a disease. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the following sources: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1966 to 2012), EMBASE (1980 to 2012), CINAHL (1982 to 2012) and PSYCINFO (1990 to 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: Prospective trials with or without randomisation or blinding involving the use of drug therapies for the treatment of delirium in adult patients in the terminal phase of a disease. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed trial quality using standardised methods and extracted trial data. We collected outcomes related to efficacy and adverse effects. MAIN

resultsOne trial met the criteria for inclusion. In the 2012 update search we retrieved 3066 citations but identified no new trials. The included trial evaluated 30 hospitalised AIDS patients receiving one of three agents: chlorpromazine, haloperidol and lorazepam. The trial under-reported key methodological features. It found overall that patients in the chlorpromazine group and those in the haloperidol group had fewer symptoms of delirium at follow-up (to below the diagnostic threshold using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III) and that both were equally effective (at two days mean difference (MD) 0.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.58 to 5.32; between two and six days MD -0.21; 95% CI -5.35 to 4.93). Chlorpromazine and haloperidol were found to be no different in improving cognitive status in the short term (at 48 hours) but at subsequent follow-up cognitive status was reduced in those taking chlorpromazine. Improvements from baseline to day two for patients randomised to lorazepam were not apparent. All patients on lorazepam (n = 6) developed adverse effects, including oversedation and increased confusion, leading to trial drug discontinuation. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere remains insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about the role of drug therapy in the treatment of delirium in terminally ill patients. Thus, practitioners should continue to follow current clinical guidelines. Further research is essential.

Indexed as

AdultAntipsychotic AgentsChlorpromazineDeliriumHaloperidolHumansLorazepamRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTerminally IllAntipsychotic AgentsChlorpromazineHaloperidolLorazepam

Identifiers

PMID23152226
OpenAlexW1941157597

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.