Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25398099›Full record

Observational studyPloS one2014

Delirium, sedation and analgesia in the intensive care unit: a multinational, two-part survey among intensivists.

Alawi Luetz, Felix Balzer, Finn M Radtke, Christina Jones, Giuseppe Citerio, Bernhard Walder, Bjoern Weiss, Klaus-Dieter Wernecke, Claudia Spies

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01278524 (International Multicenter Study One Day Prevalence Observational Study for Delirium on ICU), which is not on this map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

NCT01278524 completednot on this map

International Multicenter Study One Day Prevalence Observational Study for Delirium on ICU

TypeobservationalSponsorClaudia SpiesRan2011 to 2011Enrolled1,002ConditionsDelirium
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 119 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. [Pitfalls in the diagnosis of delirium].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Alawi LuetzDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Felix BalzerDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Finn M RadtkeDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Christina JonesWhiston Hospital, Critical Care Unit, Prescot, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Giuseppe CiterioHospital San Gerardo, Department of Emergency Medicine, Monza, Italy.
Bernhard WalderService d'Anesthesiologie, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland.
Bjoern WeissDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Klaus-Dieter WerneckeSostana GmbH, Berlin, Germany.
Claudia SpiesDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Campus Charité Mitte and Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEAzienda Ospedaliera San Gerardo · ITHôpital Beau-Séjour · CHWhiston Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Analgesia, sedation and delirium management are important parts of intensive care treatment as they are relevant for patients' clinical and functional long-term outcome. Previous surveys showed that despite this fact implementation rates are still low. The primary aim of the prospective, observational multicenter study was to investigate the implementation rate of delirium monitoring among intensivists. Secondly, current practice concerning analgesia and sedation monitoring as well as treatment strategies for patients with delirium were assesed. In addition, this study compares perceived and actual practice regarding delirium, sedation and analgesia management. Data were obtained with a two-part, anonymous survey, containing general data from intensive care units in a first part and data referring to individual patients in a second part. Questionnaires from 101 hospitals (part 1) and 868 patients (part 2) were included in data analysis. Fifty-six percent of the intensive care units reported to monitor for delirium in clinical routine. Fourty-four percent reported the use of a validated delirium score. In this respect, the survey suggests an increasing use of delirium assessment tools compared to previous surveys. Nevertheless, part two of the survey revealed that in actual practice 73% of included patients were not monitored with a validated score. Furthermore, we observed a trend towards moderate or deep sedation which is contradicting to guideline-recommendations. Every fifth patient was suffering from pain. The implementation rate of adequate pain-assessment tools for mechanically ventilated and sedated patients was low (30%). In conclusion, further efforts are necessary to implement guideline recommendations into clinical practice. The study was registered (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01278524) and approved by the ethical committee.

Indexed as

AnalgesiaDeep SedationHealth SurveysIntensive Care UnitsInternationalitySurveys and QuestionnairesAgedDeliriumDemographyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID25398099
PMCPMC4232258
OpenAlexW2089719632

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.