Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34396454›Full record

SynthesisNeurosurgical review2022

Delirium in neurosurgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

P R Kappen, E Kakar, C M F Dirven, M van der Jagt, M Klimek, R J Osse, A P J E Vincent

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.7field-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.

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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

P R KappenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands. p.kappen@erasmusmc.nl.
E KakarDepartment of Neuroscience, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
C M F DirvenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
M van der JagtDepartment of Intensive Care Adults, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
M KlimekDepartment of Anesthesiology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
R J OsseDepartment of Psychiatry, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
A P J E VincentDepartment of Neurosurgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Delirium is a frequent occurring complication in surgical patients. Nevertheless, a scientific work-up of the clinical relevance of delirium after intracranial surgery is lacking. We conducted a systematic review (CRD42020166656) to evaluate the current diagnostic work-up, incidence, risk factors and health outcomes of delirium in this population. Five databases (Embase, Medline, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central) were searched from inception through March 31st, 2021. Twenty-four studies (5589 patients) were included for qualitative analysis and twenty-one studies for quantitative analysis (5083 patients). Validated delirium screening tools were used in 70% of the studies, consisting of the Confusion Assessment Method (intensive care unit) (45%), Delirium Observation Screening Scale (5%), Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (10%), Neelon and Champagne Confusion Scale (5%) and Nursing Delirium Screening Scale (5%). Incidence of post-operative delirium after intracranial surgery was 19%, ranging from 12 to 26% caused by variation in clinical features and delirium assessment methods. Meta-regression for age and gender did not show a correlation with delirium. We present an overview of risk factors and health outcomes associated with the onset of delirium. Our review highlights the need of future research on delirium in neurosurgery, which should focus on optimizing diagnosis and assessing prognostic significance and management.

Indexed as

DeliriumNeurosurgeryCritical CareHumansIncidenceIntensive Care UnitsDeliriumIncidence ratesNeurosurgeryScreening tools

Identifiers

PMID34396454
PMCPMC8827408
OpenAlexW3194848116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.