ArticleAnaesthesia2026
Delirium identification, prevention and management in intensive care units in England, Wales and Northern Ireland: a survey of practice.
Article in Anaesthesia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Critical care delirium: prevention, identification and management: a narrative review.Anaesthesia · 2026Review
- The reasons hypoactive delirium is often overlooked: a reply.Anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators to the delivery of delirium care in intensive care units: an analysis informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework.Anaesthesia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDelirium is the most common sign of acute brain dysfunction and is prevalent in ICUs. This work is part of a UK National Institute of Health and Social Care Research-funded Programme Development Grant to identify optimal approaches to prevent, identify and manage ICU delirium in the UK. This survey aimed to provide a baseline for contemporary practice.
methodsA structured online survey was designed and sent to all ICUs in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, identified through the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre Case Mix Programme. Participants were asked to provide a response that reflected ICU-level care.
resultsThe ICU participant response rate was 249/268 (93%). Of these, 222/249 (89%) ICUs screened for ICU delirium routinely and 208/222 (94%) used the CAM-ICU tool. Delirium care packages were applied by 125/249 (50%) ICUs, but 81/125 (68%) conveyed that this was not consistent for all patients. Both antipsychotics and benzodiazepines are used commonly to manage delirium. All respondents stated that early mobilisation; early removal of invasive catheters; maintenance of hearing aids/glasses; regular mealtimes; and daytime activity were used as non-pharmaceutical delirium management strategies. Enhanced follow-up was reported by 195/249 (79%) respondents, either routinely or for selected cases. DISCUSSION: Only half of UK ICUs use a standardised care package to prevent and manage ICU delirium, with inconsistent implementation. Future work should focus on the development and evaluation of an evidence-based and sustainable care package.
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.