ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2020
[Study protocol to improve the quality of delirium management in intensive care].
Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Pitfalls in the diagnosis of delirium].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2022Review
- [Delirium-assessment, prevention and treatment : Task in the interprofessional intensive care unit team].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDelirium in cardiac surgery patients is common and is associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation and hospital stay as well as higher mortality. Protocols may improve outcome. In our cardiac surgery intensive care unit (ICU), patients with delirium have not received standardized treatment so far. HYPOTHESIS: In cardiac surgery ICU patients, standardized delirium management will lead after a 4‑week introduction, compared to nonstandardized treatment, to a reduction of delirium duration.
methodsProspective before/after study to evaluate a quality improvement project for delirium management over 12 weeks including 140 patients. INCLUSION CRITERIA: (a) ≥18 years, (b) consent for research with their data. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: (a) palliative status, (b) present during both the before/after phase, (c) pregnancy, (d) included in a competitive study, or (e) delirium not assessable. The implementation includes the introduction of a protocol with interprofessional training, bedside-teaching, pocket cards, posters, and reminders. The primary outcome is the duration of delirium, assessed four times a day with validated instruments. Secondary outcome measures include delirium incidence, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of stay in ICU and hospital, mortality, nursing/therapeutic interventions, cumulative doses of delirium-related drugs, and complications of delirium for a follow-up of 28 days. Empirical data will be analyzed with descriptive and inferential statistics.
objectivesThe purpose of the study is a reduction of the duration and frequency of delirium in cardiac ICU patients and will provide evidence of the effect size of the introduction of a delirium management.
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.