Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36402941›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2022

Nurses' competence in recognition and management of delirium in older patients: development and piloting of a self-assessment tool.

Jonas Hoch, Jürgen M Bauer, Martin Bizer, Christine Arnold, Petra Benzinger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

5 authors.

Jonas HochCenter for Geriatric Medicine, Heidelberg University Hospital, AGAPLESION Bethanien Hospital Heidelberg, Rohrbacher Strasse 149, 69126, Heidelberg, Germany.
Jürgen M BauerCenter for Geriatric Medicine, Heidelberg University Hospital, AGAPLESION Bethanien Hospital Heidelberg, Rohrbacher Strasse 149, 69126, Heidelberg, Germany.
Martin BizerDepartment of Internal Medicine, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 672, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Christine ArnoldDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Petra BenzingerCenter for Geriatric Medicine, Heidelberg University Hospital, AGAPLESION Bethanien Hospital Heidelberg, Rohrbacher Strasse 149, 69126, Heidelberg, Germany. petra.benzinger@agaplesion.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDelirium is a common condition in elderly inpatients. Health care professionals play a crucial role in recognizing delirium, initiating preventive measures and implementing a multicomponent treatment strategy. Yet, delirium often goes unrecognized in clinical routine. Nurses take an important role in preventing and managing delirium. This study assesses clinical reasoning of nurses using case vignettes to explore their competences in recognizing, preventing and managing delirium.

methodsThe study was conducted as an online survey. The questionnaire was based on five case vignettes presenting cases of acutely ill older patients with different subtypes of delirium or diseases with overlapping symptoms. In a first step, case vignettes were developed and validated through a multidisciplinary expert panel. Scoring of response options were summed up to a Geriatric Delirium Competence Questionnaire (GDCQ) score including recognition and management tasks The questionnaire was made available online. Descriptive analyses and group comparisons explores differences between nurses from different settings. Factors explaining variance in participants' score were evaluated using correlations and linear regression models.

resultsThe questionnaire demonstrated good content validity and high reliability (kappa = 0.79). The final sample consisted of 115 nurses. Five hundred seventy-five case vignettes with an accuracy of 0.71 for the correct recognition of delirium presence or absence were solved. Nurses recognized delirium best in cases describing hyperactive delirium (79%) while hypoactive delirium was recognized least (44%). Nurses from geriatric and internal medicine departments had significantly higher GDCQ-score than the other subgroups. Management tasks were correctly identified by most participants.

conclusionsOverall, nurses' competence regarding hypoactive delirium should be strengthened. The online questionnaire might facilitate targeting training opportunities to nurses' competence.

Indexed as

DeliriumNursesAgedHumansInpatientsReproducibility of ResultsSelf-AssessmentClinical reasoningDeliriumDelirium managementDelirium recognitionEducational interventionGeriatricNursingOlder adultVignette-based questionnaire

Identifiers

PMID36402941
PMCPMC9675220

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.